*>'^^*'SR^'^^^BC^''^^^''*T^'Si^f'^'^-*^ *^f  "t'-* /■■--'■'-'■  ■•  r  r 


A   CHAPTER 


FROM    THE   8T0RY    OF 


PAULINE   PARSONS 


THEOPHILUS  BRASS 


THERE  can  b«  no 
Kop«  of  progress  or 
freedom  for  the 
people  witKout  tWe  un- 
restricted and  complete 
enjoyment  of  tKe  rigkt 
of  free  speech,  free  press 
and   peaceful  assembly. 


Gift  of 
IRA  B.  CROSS 





UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
AT    LOS  ANGELES 


/wR  c,.*^ 


A    CHAPTER 


FROM  THE  STORY  OF 


PAULINE  PARSONS 


BY 


THEOPHILUS  BRASS 


'.  :   .•'•  'l* 


o    '     •     •»"       >  J  J     .»* 


ASHLAND,  MASS. 

WILLIAM  P.  MORRISON 
1916 


Copyright,  1916,  by 
William  P.  Morrison 


^  ^f  Cat   n 


•    •  ••■>  .•  •••  *    .   •  •  .   ••- .  . 
;.••-•••••    • •• 


THK  THOBNTON  PBB88 
WINTHROP,   MASS. 


363 


:o 

I— 

CO 
»H 

C3 

ULi 

o 


t^ 


3 

PAULINE  PARSONS 

in 

CT5 


233473 


PREFACE 

During  the  last  decade  writers  upon  the  higher  life  of 
man  who  claim  to  have  transcendental  sanctions  for  their 
theories  whether  frankly  conservative  or  ostensibly  radical  have 
been  growing  in  courage  and  have  even  proclaimed  that  the 
positive  and  agnostic  attitude  of  the  last  century  is  a  thing 
permanently  of  the  past. 

During  the  same  period  the  utterances  of  politicians  of  a 
certain  type  have  disclosed  a  growing  distrust  of  democracy. 
The  distrust  has,  naturally,  been  implied  rather  than  expressed, 
and  has  evinced  itself  mainly  in  more  or  less  covert  sugges- 
tions that  we  accept  a  new  definition  of  democracy.  We  are 
still  to  have  government  for  the  people — it  is  said — but  by 
experts  instead  of  by  the  people;  and  by  corporate  experts 
not  at  all  responsible  to  us  or  by  government  experts  only 
indirectly  so,  or  by  both. 

Is  there  any  connection  between  the  two  tendencies?  And 
is  either  or  both  to  be  regarded  as  in  the  line  of  progress  ?  Or 
are  they  to  be  regarded  as  reactions  from  a  previous  upward 
swing  to  be  followed  later  by  another  advance? 

In  the  following  conversation  some  suggestions  are  made 
that  may  help  to  answer  these  questions. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/chapterfromstoryOObrasiala 


CHARACTERS 

The  Occasion:    The  dvrmer  given  by  Miss  Parsons  on  the 
9  th  of  June,  190 —  at  her  residence  on  Essex  Neck, 
The  People 

Miss  Pauline  Paesons,  the  hostess,  an  heiress  of  crystal  mind 
and  tender  heart,  said  to  he  betrothed  to  Prince  Friedrich 
of  Hohenblenheim. 

Mrs.  Merlin,  her  aunt  and  chaperon. 

Mrs.  Olivia  Orton,  another  av/nt,  a  believer  in  supermen. 

Mrs.  Lurton,  a  timorous  liberal. 

Mrs.  Hardy,  a  mystic. 

Miss  Barbara  Fleming,  a  clever  butterfly. 

Miss  Elsingham,  rich  and  philanthropic;    a  conservative. 

Miss  Elsack,  a  lecturer  on  feminism  and  eugenics, 

Mr.  Sounder,  a  pragmatist. 

Mr.  Ransom,  a  transcendental  idealist  of  the  Hegelian  type. 

Professor  Hardy,  a  transcendental  idealist  of  the  Kantian 
type. 

Mr.  Barlow,  Miss  Parsons'  new  business  secretary,  an  agnos- 
tic positive  idealist. 

Commodore  Lurton,  a  liberal  business  mam. 

Mr.  Condor,  a  captain  of  industry. 

Mr.  Crandall,  a  conservative  lawyer,  interested  in  the  opera- 
tions of  the  banking  house  of  Bemis  <§•  Co.;  an  idealist 
except  in  the  matter  of  making  his  living. 

Mr.  Robert  Lovering,  a  liberal  lawyer. 

Mr.  Charles  Boyd,  Miss  Parsons'  cousin;  a  partisan  admirer 
of  Mr.  Barlow. 

Professor  Mann,  a  biologist. 

Professor  Walthall,  an  economist. 

Mr.  a.  Puffington  Puff,  essayist,  lecturer  and  novelist;  a 
social  lion. 

The  Circumstances:  In  view  of  Miss  Parson's  approaching 
departure  from  America  for  good,  a  powerful  group  of 
financiers  headed  by  Bemis  Sf  Co.,  have  concluded  that 
the  Parsons'  mill  property  is  a  melon  ripe  for  cutting. 


and  have  laid  their  plans  to  buy  it,  incorporate  and  sell 
it  to  the  public.  But  Miss  Parsons,  who  comes  of  fighting 
forbears,  objects  and  has  given  her  secretary  the  task  of 
devising  means  of  resistance  and  a  plan  to  share  profits 
with  her  employees. 


A  CHAPTER  FROM  THE  STORY  OF 
PAULINE  PARSONS 


"Am  I  surrounded  by  pragraatists,  Mr.  Barlow?  Are  you 
a  pragmatist,  too?"  asked  Miss  Fleming. 

"No.  I'm  not.  I'll  keep  your  communications  open  on 
this  side.  Go  on  and  pound  him.  I've  been  listening.  You 
have  him  beaten  if  you  push  your  advantage,"  he  replied 
with  laughing  encouragement. 

"Have  I  really?  Do  you  think  I  had  the  better  of  the 
argument?" 

"You  certainly  had." 

"But  I've  fired  my  last  shot." 

"Then  make  a  general  charge  along  the  whole  front." 

"Mercy!  That  sounds  most  militant.  I'm  afraid,"  said 
Barbara  mendaciously. 

"I  mean  just  sum  up  what  you  have  been  saying.  Tell 
him  pragmatism  is  an  old  vice  which  we  are  steadily  trying 
to  shake  off,  not  a  new  virtue  to  be  embraced — that  it  is 
intellectual  anarchy  founded  on  the  false  premise  that  man 
and  each  man  is  the  center  of  the  universe — ^but  a  Machiav- 
elian  anarchy  fomented  to  save  authority  from  responsibility 
to  law.  That  a  good  definition  of  intellectual  progress  would 
be  getting  rid  of  pragmatic — that  is  perspective — points  of 
view  and  pragmatic  dogmas." 

Mr.  Barlow  was  aware  of  his  tendency  to  make  speeches 
and  had  made  many  resolutions  to  refrain  but  in  the  presence 
of  temptation  he  invariably  forgot  his  resolutions. 

'*0h,  but  the  pragmatists  deprecate  the  use  of  abstrac- 
tion, dogma  and  all  that  sort  of  thing!"  objected  Barbara. 
"You  see  I  like  to  take  the  opposite  side  from  that  of  the 
person  with  whom  I  am  conversing.  Do  you  think  that  is  a 
sign  of  intellectual  instability?" 


10  PAULINE    PARSONS 

**Not  at  all — you  simply  assume  an  attitude  of  philosophic 
doubt,"  said  Mr.  Barlow  smiling  approvingly  into  the  girl's 
eager  eyes.  It  was  at  this  moment  that  Pauline  turned  her 
eyes  towards  them  for  the  second  or  third  time.  With  each 
inspection  she  had  become  more  disturbed.  It  seemed  to  her 
as  if  Mr.  Barlow  and  Miss  Fleming  were  carrying  on  a  most 
desperate  flirtation. 

**I'm  not  surprised  at  Barbara.  She  is  a  regular  coquette. 
But  I  am  surprised  at  him.  I  thought  he  was  more  cool- 
headed  than  to  allow  himself  to  be  fooled  by  the  first  pretty 
girl  that  makes  eyes  at  him.  But  then  he's  not  used  to  girls. 
I  ought  not  to  have  seated  her  next  to  him.  Mercy,  though! 
I  don't  see  why  I  should  bother.  I  don't  have  to  constitute 
myself  his  guardian  just  because  he's  my  secretary.  He's 
old  enough  to  take  care  of  himself.  But  then  he  doesn't  know 
how  heartless  girls  can  be.  I  wonder  what  they  find  so  inter- 
esting to  talk  about.  There!  Just  look  at  that!  He's  as 
bad  as  she  is." 

Mr.  Barlow's  smile  was  particularly  appreciative  just 
then  for  the  girl's  eyes  were  looking  soulfuUy  into  his.  Miss 
Fleming  was  indeed  a  coquette.  With  all  her  higher  educa- 
tion she  was  still  an  essential  woman.  Man  was  her  rightful 
prey. 

Pauline  could  see  Mr.  Barlow's  smile.  But  she  could  see 
his  smile  only — the  smile  she  had  come  to  regard  as  her  per- 
sonal property.  She  could  not  see  his  eyes  for  they  were 
looking  down  into  Miss  Fleming's.  Hence  she  could  not  see 
that  there  was  missing  in  them  a  meaning  that  was  never 
missing  when  they  looked  into  hers.  Pauline's  slim  fingers 
clutched  nervously  the  delicate  lace  fan  in  her  lap. 

"Mr.  Barlow!"  said  Miss  Fleming  appreciatively.  "What 
a  nice  compliment!" 

Then  she  gave  a  rippling  laugh  and  tapped  him  on  the 
arm  with  her  fan. 

The  one  in  Pauline's  lap — poor  thing — had  to  suffer  in 
consequence. 

"How  times  have  changed,  Mr.  Barlow,"  said  Miss  Fleming. 
"If  a  man  had  said  that  to  my  grandmother  she  would  have 
thought  him  a  queer  stick.  But  I  like  it.  We  like  it.  We 
like  men  to  take  us  seriously.  Now  to  return  to  our  discus- 
sion.    Isn't  man  the  center  of  the  universe — to  man?" 

**Yes — in  so  far  as  his  needs  as  they  develop  are  his  guide 


PAULINE    PARSONS  11 

to  the  best  form  in  which  to  express  the  truth  as  it  is  dis- 
covered. But  he  is  not  the  center  of  the  universe  as  an 
isometric  fact;  nor  are  his  needs  dogmatically  preconceived, 
to  be  taken  as  the  criterion  of  positive,  substantive  truth  or 
even  of  the  best  way  of  expressing  it  in  *shorthand.'  " 

"There!  You  use  the  word  dogma  again.  But  the  prag- 
matist  abjures  dogma — even  scientific  dogma,"  laughed  Bar- 
bara.   "Does  he  not?" 

"It's  one  thing  to  swear  off  on  dogma  and  another  to  be 
a  total  abstainer,"  said  Mr.  Barlow.  "What  is  a  dogmatist.^ 
One  is  he  who  has  a  preconceived  theory  of  things,  constructed 
without  regard  to  things  as  they  seem — or  with  regard  to 
things  as  they  seem  but  with  and  upon  the  assumption  of  a 
known  relation  of  phenomena  to  a  postulated  Absolute.  A 
scientific  hjrpothesis  however  bold  is  very  different.  It  must 
fit,  explain,  be  consistent  with  things  as  experienced  up  to 
date — known  facts.  It  cannot  outlive  a  single  contradictory 
fact.  It  is  constantly  put  to  the  touchstone  of  new  facts — 
to  be,  in  consequence,  strengthened  in  belief,  modified  or  thrown 
upon  the  scrap  heap.  Another  kind  of  dogmatist  is  one  who 
holds  on  to  a  once  scientific  hypothesis  after  it  should  be 
consigned  to  the  scrap  heap.  The  anthropocentric  conception 
of  the  universe  was  once  scientific — as  science  was  then.  It 
fitted  all  the  facts  as  men  know  them.  As  adverse  facts  accu- 
mulated— as  isometric  views  of  the  universe  gradually  qualified 
perspective  views,  the  dogmatists — some  of  them — just  ignored 
them — others  fell  back  upon  anthropocentric  theories  of  the 
universe  based  upon  postulates  of  the  relation  between  phe- 
nomena and  an  assumed  Absolute.  Now  comes  another  faction 
of  the  same  cult  who  claim  to  hanker  after  facts.  But  it  seems 
that  they  hanker  after  those  facts  only  which  support  desira- 
ble propositions.  Empirical  pragmatists  we  have  had  with  us 
always.  They  have  been  the  main  obstacles  to  progress  since 
the  beginning.  But  now  comes  the  dogmatic  pragmatist  with 
his  so-called  scientific  method  of  eliminating  undesirable  prop- 
f  'tions.  First  determine  whether  a  proposition  is  fruitful  or 
not,  he  says.  On  that  determination  will  depend  whether  it  is 
true  or  not.  But  since  there  is  no  certain  way  of  determining 
the  fruitfulness  of  a  proposition  without  first  determining 
whether  it  is  true — of  the  greatest  possible  probability — I 
think  I  am  warranted  in  speaking  of  pragmatic  dogma." 


12  PAULINE    PARSONS 

"You  are  one  of  the  Rocky  Mountain  toughs,  evidently,  Mr. 
Barlow,"  commented  Miss  Fleming. 

"No — nor  one  of  the  tenderfeet  either.     I  claim  to  be  just 
a  harmless  frontiersman." 

"Frontiersman!  Splendid!  I  seem  to  see  what  you  mean. 
But  tell  me  about  him.  Professor  James  forgot  the  frontiers- 
man." 

"Dealers  in  the  dilemma  often  do  forget.  The  frontiers- 
man refuses  to  admit  that  he  has  to  choose  between  *going  by 
facts'  and  'going  by  principles.'  He  'goes  by  facts'  but  draws 
principles  from  them.  He  'goes  by  principles'  but  by  princi- 
ples based  on  facts.  He  is  neither  an  empiricist  nor  a  ra- 
tionalist— but  a  rational  empiricist." 

"Is  not  a  proposition  true  just  in  so  far  as  it  is  fruitful.'*" 
demanded  Mr.  Sounder,  Miss  Fleming's  late  antagonist. 

"Possibly — just  in  so  far  as  it  is  fruitful — but  just  in  so 
far  as  it  is  true  it  is  at  least  potentially  fruitful,"  replied  Mr. 
Barlow.  "If  you  can  prove  that  a  proposition  is  neither  fruit- 
ful nor  potentially  fruitful  you  prove,  perhaps,  that  it  has  no 
practical  truth.  But  it  does  not  follow  that  a  proposition  that 
is  alleged  to  be  fruitful  is  true  or  that  a  proposition  that  is 
alleged  to  be  barren  is  not  true.  Your  philosophy  is  based 
at  best  on  a  syllogism  of  four  terms." 

"But,  Mr.  Barlow,"  said  Miss  Fleming,  "I  understand  that 
pragmatism  has  mainly  to  do  with  propositions  that  cannot  in 
their  nature  be  decided  on  intellectual  grounds — propositions 
about  which  there  is  no  evidence — chiefly  propositions  of 
morals  and  religion." 

"As  to  morals.  Miss  Fleming,  if  there  is  no  evidence  there 
is  no  duty — we  have  only  the  spur  of  feeling  without  the  bridle 
of  knowledge,"  answered  Mr.  Barlow.  "As  to  religion — as  to 
any  proposition  upon  which  there  really  is  no  evidence  the 
pragmatic  method  is  quite  proper.  But  do  the  pragmatists 
confine  themselves  to  that  class  of  propositions  .'*  James  in 
'Pragmatism'  deals  largely  with  questions  as  to  which  there 
is  at  least  some  evidence." 

"But  you  cannot  brush  away  the  notion  of  fruitfulness  so 
easily  as  you  seem  to  think,  Mr.  Barlow,"  resumed  Mr. 
Sounder.  "You  must  admit  that  science  'frames  her  proposi- 
tions with  great  arbitrariness' — having  in  mind  that  they  must 
be  made  fruitful.  Pragmatists  simply  emphasize  the  settled 
habit  of  science." 


PAULINE    PARSONS  13 

"What  you  say  of  science  is  true,  Mr.  Sounder,"  said  the 
secretary.  "But  you  pragmatists  do  not  simply  emphasize — 
you  expand  the  habit  of  science  into  something  quite  different 
and  quite  improper.  To  describe  a  state  of  facts  in  some  de- 
gree of  completeness  may  require  five  hundred  words  or  ten 
thousand  words  and  from  that  up  to  a  full  description  of  the 
known  universe.  But  we  have  not  time  to  do  that  nor  is  it 
necessary  where  everybody  has  a  single  eye  to  gaining  the 
truth.  We  may  and  do  describe  a  state  of  facts  in  a  short 
sentence  perhaps,  the  statement  to  be  taken  in  connection  with 
the  tacit  context  understood  to  be  part  of  it.  The  scientific 
spirit  requires  us  to  use  that  short  statement  of  the  facts  which 
is  most  fruitful — fruitful  in  the  sense  of  simplifying,  clarify- 
ing truth,  banishing  confusion,  connecting  the  state  of  facts 
with  the  whole  body  of  truth.  But  the  pragmatist  pads  the 
word  fruitful  out  into  the  sense  of  melioristic — having  a  bene- 
ficial effect  upon  the  souls  of  men.  He  does  not  stop  even 
there.  Having  translated  fruitfulness  in  form  into  meliorism 
he  goes  on  to  adopt  meliorism  as  a  criterion  of  substantive 
truth  itself — as  controlling  not  merely  the  form  of  description 
but  also  the  state  of  facts  we  are  attempting  to  describe.  But 
however  we  describe  them  the  facts  remain  the  same — they 
just  are.  We  cannot  bend  the  facts  to  our  needs,  we  must 
bend  our  needs  to  the  facts.  Science  does  not  distinguish  be- 
tween good  truth  and  br.d  truth.  To  say  that  there  is  any 
truth  that  we  dare  not  know  is  to  preach  a  philosophy  of 
cowardice." 

"But  that  is  just  what  James  says  about  facts,"  exclaimed 
Mr.  Sounder.  "He  says  somewhere  in  his  'Pragmatism'  for 
instance,  that  sensations  'are  neither  true  nor  false;  they 
simply  are.  It  is  only  what  we  say  about  them,  only  the  names 
we  give  them,  our  theories  of  their  source  and  nature  and  re- 
mote relations,  that  may  be  true  or  not.'  And  in  his  chapter 
on  The  Notion  of  Truth  he  says  'the  "facts"  themselves  mean- 
while are  not  true.  They  simply  are.  Truth  is  the  function  of 
the  beliefs  that  start  and  terminate  among  them.'  " 

"Yes,  I  have  t\\\  that  in  mind,"  said  Mr.  Barlow.  "The 
whole  chapter  on  'The  Notion  of  Truth,'  barring  some  flashes 
which  taken  without  the  context  might  be  objected  to,  is  ex- 
cellent— but  not  the  special  property  of  pragmatists.  More- 
over it  is  an  excellent  illustration  of  the  inarticulateness  and 
unreality  of  your  method.     It  seems  to  give  Professor  James 


14  PAULINE    PARSONS 

great  pleasure  to  know  that  facts,  still,  just  are — while  he 
proceeds  to  substitute  fear  for  reason  in  the  interpretation  of 
them." 

"Fear  and  cowardice  are  harsh  words,  Mr.  Barlow." 

"But  there  is  some  dignity  in  fear — I  withdraw  the  word 
cowardice,"  replied  the  secretary.  "If  you  do  not  found  your 
melioristic  theory  of  truth  on  fear,  it  seems  to  me  you  are 
thrown  back  on  some  such  triviality  as  aesthcticism  or  culture 
collecting  or  religious  feeling  of  a  higher  type  but  still  of 
the  same  general  kind  that  thrives  only  in  the  light  of  stainec^ 
glass  windows." 

"Illustrate,  Mr.  Barlow!"  demanded  Barbara. 

"On  what  other  ground  does  Professor  James  advance 
meliorism  as  a  reason  for  postulating  the  freedom  of  the  will 
than  fear  that  man  if  he  comes  to  believe  in  determinism  will 
lose  his  sense  of  dignity  and  responsibility  and  so  morally 
perish?  And  does  he  not  reject  the  theory  of  evolution — 
having  first  repeated  that  old  libel  that  it  leads  to  materialism 
— on  the  ground  that  if  he  believes  in  evolution,  he  will  have 
to  share  Mr.  Balfour's  melodramatic  gloom  over  the  universal 
death  to  follow?" 

"But  these  are  metaphysical  problems,  are  they  not?" 
asked  Mrs.  Orton  across  the  table.  "James  so  classifies  them 
in  his  'Pragmatism.'  " 

**But  how  can  you  say  that  the  belief  in  a  mechanical  evo- 
lution is  not  materialistic?"  asked  Mr.  Crandall  who  sat  next 
to  Mrs.  Orton  on  her  right.  Mr.  Crandall  was  an  idealist — 
except  in  the  matter  of  earning  his  bread. 

"At  any  rate  it  is  mechanical — without  soul,"  suggested 
Miss  Elsingham,  from  Pauline's  end  of  the  table. 

"Isn't  Mr.  Balfour's  gloomy  picture  of  the  end  of  dissolu- 
tion warranted?"  asked  Mrs.  Lurton.  The  Commodore's  lady 
had  a  heart  full  of  love  for  her  fellows.  Though  inclined  to  be 
liberal  in  her  beliefs  she  had  clung  stubbornly  to  her  faith  in 
the  spiritual  reality  of  those  mansions  in  the  skies  which  would 
some  day  shelter  the  poor  and  needy. 

"Do  you  mean  to  say  that  you  cannot  do  as  you  want, 
Mr.  Barlow?"  This  from  Miss  Elsack,  the  lecturer  and  writer 
on  feminism  and  eugenics.  She  had  never  found  any  difficulty 
in  believing  in  both  moral  eugenics  and  free  will. 

"But  Professor  James's  book  does  not  pretend  to  be  a 
contribution    to   science,"    asserted   young   Professor    Hardy, 


PAULINE    PARSONS  15 

from  Mrs.  Merlin's  end  of  the  table.  "It  is  a  discourse  upon 
philosophy." 

"Just  what  do  you  mean  by  empirical  pragmatism, 
Barlow?"  asked  Bob  Lovering,  who  sat  directly  opposite  Mr. 
Barlow. 

At  this  bombardment  of  queries,  Mr.  Barlow,  who  had 
been  entirely  oblivious  of  the  fact  that  others  than  Miss  Flem- 
ing and  Mr.  Sounder  were  listening  to  him,  cast  a  startled 
look  around  the  table.  Once  more  he  regretted  his  propensity 
to  make  speeches. 

"It  is  strange.  Miss  Parsons,"  said  Professor  Mann,  "how 
mature  men  can  take  the  serious  interest  Mr.  Barlow  seems 
to  take  in  fundamental  speculation." 

"It  is  strange.  Professor,"  agreed  Pauline,  "if  the  fundar 
mentals  are  floated  in  the  air.  But  if  they  are  founded  upon 
solid  ground  it  seems  to  me  that  a  reasoned  theory  must  help 
a  man's  work." 

"You  surprise  me.  Miss  Parsons,"  and  the  Professor  looked 
his  surprise.  "I  have  no  time  for  fundamentals  and  I  had 
supposed  that  you  were  of  the  kind  to  urge  taking  hold  of 
the  work  at  hand  and  letting  the  idlers  philosophize." 

"I  certainly  do  not  approve  of  philosophising  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  work  at  hand,"  said  Pauline.  "But  my  observa- 
tion is  that  even  the  busiest  people  inevitably  construct  their 
philosophies  between  strokes — ^but  too  much  upon  the  authority 
of  these  very  idlers.  Perhaps  a  few  strokes  would  not  be 
missed  and  the  time  well  spent  in  rounding  up  the  results  of 
their  own  thought." 

"But  what  is  the  good  of  it?" 

"Well,  it  seems  to  me  that  if  a  man's  philosophy  is  hap- 
hazard his  influence  in  the  world  will  be  haphazard;  if  it  is 
unreal  he  may  be  a  positive  drag.  If  a  man's  philosophy  fits 
itself  to  real  life  and  has  a  clarifying  effect  you  will  find  him 
always  pushing  the  work  of  the  world  forward  instead  of 
sometimes  forward  and  sometimes  backward." 

During  this  colloquy  between  Pauline  and  Professor  Mann 
the  bombardment  of  Mr.  Barlow  continued. 

"This  is  splendid!"  cried  Barbara  in  high  spirit.  "We 
will  have  a  regular  debate.  But  one  question  at  a  time,  please. 
I  shall  appoint  myself  moderator  of  the  meeting;  because  it 
was  I  who  discovered  Mr.  Barlow.  I  foresee  that  this  is 
going  to  be  the  most  enjoyable  dinner  ever." 


16  PAULINE    PARSONS 

"The  idea !"  said  Pauline  to  herself.    **My  secretary !" 

Then  she  remembered  that  Miss  Fleming  did  not  know 
that  Mr.  Barlow  was  her  secretary.  Pauline  had  never  been 
in  the  habit  of  introducing  Phoebe  Lenham  as  her  secretary. 
She  had  decided  to  adopt  the  same  course  as  to  Mr.  Barlow. 
Outside  of  the  immediate  family  only  Bob  and  Constance 
Lovering,  Charles  Boyd  and  Mr.  Crandall  knew  of  Mr.  Bar- 
low's status.  Pauline  had  not  told  even  Mrs.  Orton  that  he 
was  her  secretary.  Her  aunt  was  not  always  considerate  of 
the  feelings  of  those  whom  she  considered  subordinates  and 
the  time  had  been  too  short  to  explain  Mr.  Barlow's  danger 
points. 

Mrs.  Orton  was  a  believer  in  supermen — not  merely  in 
the  Nietzschean  men  of  blood  and  iron  but  in  all  big  men 
who  made  little  men  drill  in  regiments. 

"Anyway  she  has  not  discovered  the  man,''  added  Pauline 
to  herself. 

"Now,  Mr.  Barlow,"  said  Barbara  crisply,  "tell  us — is 
the  theory  of  evolution  a  metaphysical  speculation?  And 
is  the  question  of  free  will  a  metaphysical  speculation.'^" 

"There  must  be  others  here  who  are  better  able  to  answer 
these  questions,"  protested  Mr.  Barlow. 

"No — not  at  all.  It's  easy  to  see  you  know  what  you  are 
talking  about,"  insisted  Barbara.  "Besides,  if  we  had  every- 
body putting  in  his  answer  we  should  have  just  a  lot  of 
loose  talk — as  we  so  often  have  when  we  discuss  such  subjects 
as  these.     Come,  Mr.  Barlow." 

"And  why  not  answer  my  question  about  pragmatism 
before  we  leave  that  topic.  Barlow.?"  asked  Bob. 

"Address  the  chair,  please,"  quoth  Barbara.  "However, 
I  think  Bob's  is  a  good  suggestion.  But  the  answer  must 
be  final  on  that  branch  of  the  subject." 

All  eyes  were  turned  upon  Miss  Parsons'  secretary.  He 
glanced  towards  the  head  of  the  table.  But  it  happened 
that  Mr.  Puff  had  chosen  that  moment  to  inform  Pauline  that 
an  American  could  not  listen  long  to  the  smoking-room  talk 
of  the  London  clubs  without  feeling  ashamed  of  the  influences 
his  country  had  had  on  political  methods  over  there — if  mem- 
bers were  paid  no  gentleman  could  afford  to  enter  politics. 

So  Mr.  Barlow  could  not  catch  Miss  Parsons'  eye. 


PAULINE    PARSONS  17 


II 


"Well,  then,  Miss  Fleming.  I  will  do  the  best  I  can,"  he 
said.  "I  mean  by  empirical  pragmatists,  Lovering,  those 
who  from  time  immemorial  have  been  in  the  habit  of  confusing 
the  issue,  talking  off  the  point,  arguing  about  words  instead 
of  the  ideas  conveyed  by  them,  in  general  kicking  up  a  dust 
to  hide  the  truth,  without  going  through  the  formality  of 
seeking  a  fundamental,  philosophical  or  scientific  warrant  for 
loose  thinking  to  convenient  ends." 

"Now,  Mr.  Barlow — the  theory  of  evolution  and  meta- 
physics," prompted  Barbara  when  he  had  come  to  a  stop. 

He  glanced  again  towards  the  head  of  the  table.  This 
time  he  caught  Pauline's  eye,  but  there  was  no  message  in  it 
either  of  approval  or  disapproval. 

"It  seems  to  me,  then,"  he  began  with  an  air  of  resigna- 
tion, and  not  a  little  disturbed  at  the  lack  of  expression  in 
Miss  Parsons'  eyes,  "that  the  best  guide  to  clear  thinking 
ever  devised  was  the  division  of  man's  intellectual  activities 
into  two  main  fields :  the  inquiry  as  to  what  are,  if  any,  the 
laws  of  appearance — phenomena;  and  the  inquiry  what  is  the 
Ultimate  and  Absolute  Reality  behind  appearance.  The  first 
is  the  domain  of  science — or  of  philosophy  if  you  mean  by 
philosophy,  as  Spencer  does,  completely  unified  science.  The 
second  field  is  the  domain  of  the  old  philosophy — ontology 
and  metaphysics — and  of  religion.  Now  to  put  the  theory  of 
evolution — the  theory  of  orderly  progress  throughout  the  do- 
main of  phenomena — within  the  domain  of  metaphysics  seems 
to  me  the  grossest  kind  of  confusion  in  thought,  Mrs.  Orton. 
If  I  am  wrong — if  this  is  clear  thinking — then  my  mental 
equipment  is  unfit  for  discussion  with  those  who  so  classify 
our  speculations." 

"You  are  perfectly  correct,  Barlow,"  said  Bob,  "The 
theory  of  evolution,  however  speculative,  is  wholly  a  matter  of 
science — even  if  it  is  bad  speculation — and  of  course  I  do  not 
believe  that  it  is  bad." 

"Then  as  to  determinism,  or  as  James  calls  it,  inaccu- 
rately, fatalism,  and  free  will,"  continued  Mr.  Barlow,  "if 
this    is    a    metaphysical   question    then    the   question    whether 


18  PAULINE    PARSONS 

there  are  any  sciences  of  the  higher  life  of  man  is  a  meta- 
physical question.  And  here,  Miss  Elsack,  we  come  to  the 
answer  to  your  inquiry.  Of  course  I  can  do  as  I  want.  Not 
only  that  but  I  cannot  do  anything  else.  My  will — the  name, 
not  of  a  faculty,  but  of  a  process,  the  process  of  turning 
desire  into  action — is  absolutely  under  the  control  of  my 
preponderating  desires.  If  there  is  anything  'free'  it  is  desire, 
not  will.  If  human  desires  are  free,  Mrs.  Orton,  it  is  useless 
to  study  them  as  if  they  can  be  reduced  to  fruitful  order. 
Ethics,  economics,  psychology  and  all  kindred  studies  become 
empty  pastimes.  Prohibitive  law  is  effective  only  because  it 
happens  so.  Punishments  may  any  day  be  regarded  as  prizes 
and  prizes  as  punishments.  About  human  conduct  that  is 
just  the  output  of  several  hundred  million  kaleidoscopic  wills 
working  under  no  common  principles  and,  severally,  under 
no  continuing  principles,  without  order  without  any  past  that 
counts — causeless  and  without  reactive  effect,  you  can  frame 
no  answerable  questions.  Politics  and  slap-jack  you  may 
class  together." 

"Then  do  we  mean  just  nothing  at  all  when  we  speak  of 
one  having  a  strong  will,"  asked  Miss  Elsack. 

"We  mean  an  immense  deal.  We  mean  roughly  that  he 
knows  what  he  wants  and  is  sufficiently  steadfast  in  his  sterner 
desires  to  act  along  more  or  less  consistent  lines." 

"And  by  one  with  a  weak  will  that  his  desires  do  not 
stay  put  long  enough  to  keep  him  plugging  at  it.''"  added 
Barbara.  "He  is  never  sure  that  any  particular  game  is 
worth  the  candle." 

"Excellent!"  exclaimed  Mr.  Barlow,  looking  appreci- 
atively into  her  animated  face. 

Pauline's  little  hands  worked  nervously  with  the  fan  in 
her  lap. 

"If  you  are  going  to  be  moderator  you  must  not  take 
sides,  Barbara,"  said  Charles. 

**Order!"  exclaimed  Barbara.     Then  she  resumed. 

"Now,  Mr.  Barlow,  tell  Miss  Elsingham  and  Mr.  Crandall 
why  it  is  a  libel  to  speak  of  the  theory  of  evolution  as  ma- 
terialistic— or  mechanical." 

Mr.  Barlow  laughed  a  little  nervously  and  cast  another 
inquiring  glance  toward  the  head  of  the  table.  He  felt  that 
for  a  "social  surplus"  he  was  tarrying  too  long  in  the  lime 
light.     But  Pauline's  face  though  cold  and  irresponsive  held 


PAULINE    PARSONS  19 

no  veto  in  it.  In  fact  a  slight  smile — thp  society  woman's 
ever-ready  veil — was  taken  by  her  secretary  as  giving  him 
her  permission  to  proceed. 

"If  you  mean  by  mechanical  a  theory  of  orderly  progress, 
Miss  Elsingham,"  he  said,  "the  term  is  proper  enough.  But 
if  you  insist  on  the  term  without  soul  having  in  mind  a 
scheme  of  finished  monotony,  stagnation  so  far  as  human  in- 
terest and  human  opportunity  is  concerned,  you  must  remem- 
ber that  though  man  is  compelled  to  work  the  machine  it 
would  not  work  without  man.     As  to  the  term  materialistic — " 

"Oh,  I  don't  see  that — about  the  working  of  the  machine," 
interrupted  Miss  Elsingham. 

"Nor  I.  It's  just  fatalism — nothing  else — if  the  will  is 
not  free  to  change — to  construct,"  concurred  Mr.  Crandall. 

"And  there  is  no  novelty  in  the  world!"  from  Miss  Elsack. 

"No,  fatalism — "  began  Mr.  Barlow,  answering  Mr.  Cran- 
dall. 

"Now,  Barbara — that  isn't  fair.  You  should  not  allow 
Mr.  Barlow  to  answer  these  last  questions  first,"  said  Mrs. 
Lurton. 

"Have  patience.  Mr.  Barlow  will  answer  them  all  in 
due  time,"  promised  Barbara. 

"I'm  afraid  you're  riding  for  a  fall  if  you  pin  your 
faith  to  my  ability  to  answer  all  these  questions.  Miss 
Fleming." 

"Come,  Mr.  Barlow,  you  won't  go  back  on  me  now  after 
I've    appointed   myself  moderator.'"'    she   challenged. 

"Well,  then,  I  think  we  have  to  look  at  it  in  this  way, 
Mr.  Crandall,"  said  Mr.  Barlow.  "When  a  new  belief  fastens 
itself  upon  one  it  initiates  some  change  in  one's  character. 
One  will  act  differently  after  the  new  belief  is  established 
than  before.  If  the  new  belief  is  that  human  conduct  has  its 
inexorable  laws,  and  this  new  belief  only  half  understood, 
causes  a  man  to  relax  his  efforts,  to  let  down,  to  think  that 
things  will  happen  anyway,  whether  he  acts  or  not,  he  be- 
comes a  fatalist.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  this  new  belief 
stimulates  a  man  to  act  appropriately  to  the  end  to  be  gained, 
knowing  that  without  the  cause  the  effect  will  not  happen, 
he  embraces  something  so  different  from  fatalism  that  it  may 
be  said  to  be  the  antithesis  of  fatalism." 

"Illustrate,  Mr.  Barlow,  I  have  to  have  concrete  exam- 
ples," said  Miss  Elsingham. 


20  PAULINE    PARSONS 

"The  fatalist  says  the  fates  have  decreed  whether  I  shall 
feast  tomorrow  or  not.  Therefore  it  makes  no  difference 
whether  or  not  I  work  today.  His  mistake  is  in  believing 
that  fate  decrees  effects  without  their  causes.  He  forgets 
that  if  fate  has  decreed  that  he  shall  feast  tomorrow  it  has 
also  decreed  that  he  shall  work  today — or  some  other  cause 
— that  if  by  his  not  working  today,  it  appears  that  fate  has 
decreed  that  he  was  not  to  work  today  then  it  may  also 
turn  out  that  it  has  decreed  that  he  shall  not  feast  tomorrow. 
But  the  sole  effect  upon  a  man  of  a  clear  understanding  of 
causation  as  applied  to  conduct  is  that  if  he  would  feast 
tomorrow,  then  there  must  be  a  cause  appropriate  to  the 
effect — such  as  work  today.  And  similarly,  if  he  desires  that 
men  shall  be  politically  wise  he  will  understand  that  it  cannot 
be  accomplished  by  eliminating  political  exercise.  He  will 
frown  at  all  specious  plans  for  good  government  which  is  not 
also  responsible  government.  And  so  as  to  all  questions  of 
conduct.     It  is  the  believer  in  free  will  rather — " 

"But  the  fatalist  may  think  that  though  he  does  not  work 
today,  some  one  else  may  provide  the  feast  tomorrow,"  sug- 
gested Professor  Hardy  with  a  patronizing  smirk.  He  had 
overheard  Mrs.  Merlin  telling  Mr.  Ransom  that  Mr.  Barlow 
was  her  niece's  new  secretary.  He  had  also  observed  Pauline's 
cold  little  smile  and  had  drawn  from  it  a  different  inference 
than  the  secretary's. 

"Mr.  Hardy,  this  is  an  interesting  discussion.  We  have 
no  time  to  consider  every  grotesque  meaning  you  can  give  to 
words,"  snapped  Barbara.  "Try  and  grasp  the  idea — which 
is  that  fate  does  not  decree  effects  without  causes." 

"I'm  afraid  the  Professor's  objection  must  be  taken  as  an 
example  of  empirical  pragmatism,"  laughed  Bob  Lovering. 

"Still  Mr.  Hardy's  question  does  seem  to  suggest  the 
temporizing  tendency  of  fatalism,"  ventured  Miss  Elsack  diffi- 
dently shifting  her  glance  from  Barbara's  face.  She  was  not 
afraid  of  an  audience  but  she  was  conscious  of  standing  in 
some  awe  of  Miss  Fleming. 

"The  man  Professor  Hardy  introduces  is  not  a  fatalist," 
interposed  Mr.  Barlow  appealing  apologetically  to  Miss 
Fleming — and  thereby  causing  Pauline's  fingers  to  clutch  her 
fan  again.  "He  acknowledges,  at  least  unconsciously,  that 
there  must  be  conditions  precedent  to  his  feasting,  only  he 
prefers  to  trust  to  the  bounty  of  others  instead  of  his  own 


PAULINE    PARSONS  21 

labor.  So  far  as  he  is  conscious  of  any  philosophy  he  is 
a  dcterminist  but  his  earmark  is  indolence  and  he  would  be 
indolent,  probably,  whatever  his  philosophy." 

"Now  you  were  going  to  say  something  about  the  believer 
in  free  will,  Mr.  Barlow,"  suggested  Barbara. 

"I  was  going  to  say  that  it  is  the  believer  in  free  will 
rather  than  the  determinist  who  must  feel  the  uselessncss  of 
effort — because  of  the  trivial  consequences  of  effort — its  short 
range.  See  the  different  effects  the  two  beliefs  must  have 
upon  a  man  who  has  had  a  long  run  of  bad  luck,  as  we  call 
it.  To  the  man  who  denies  causation  in  human  affairs,  it  is 
just  luck — he  believes  in  chance — there  is  nothing  to  do  but 
hope  for  better  luck — he  may  flounder  around  and  make  a 
fuss  but  he  can  have  no  faith  in  the  far-reaching  effects  of 
conduct  since  there  can  be  no  effects  that  impinge  upon  the 
will  of  others  or  react  upon  his  own  will — thereby  binding 
them.  Most  likely  he  becomes  a  hopelessly  discontented  mem- 
ber of  society  without  any  thought  of  remedy.  The  most  he 
can  hope  to  effect  is  a  temporary  palliative.  But  the  believer 
in  the  reign  of  causation  over  human  conduct  regards  his 
so-called  bad  luck  as  a  consequence  of  his  lack  of  adjustment 
to  his  environment.  There  must  be  something  the  matter  with 
him  or  something  the  matter  with  human  institutions.  If  he 
concludes  that  the  trouble  is  with  his  own  conduct  the  con- 
clusion must  have  a  characteristic  effect  upon  his  future  con- 
duct. If  he  concludes  that  the  trouble  is  with  human  institu- 
tions he  becomes  a  more  or  less  active  agitator  for  their 
change.  Whatever  his  quality  as  an  agitator — whether  guided 
by  gross  selfishness  or  by  an  enlightened  self-interest — he  is 
not,  at  any  rate,  a  fatalist.  It  is  the  man  who  believes  in 
free  will  who  is  the  more  likely  to  play  the  part  generally 
given  to  the  fatalist.  And  so  it  seems  plain — to  me  at  least — 
that  though  men  are  compelled — by  their  desires — to  work 
the  machine  it  will  not  work  unless  men  work  it  just  because 
without  causes  there  are  no  effects.  Men  do  construct,  they 
do  create,  but  not  out  of  nothing.  With  better  knowledge 
and  wider  sympathies  they  recreate  the  past.  There  is  the 
novelty.  Miss  Elsack — not  the  kaleidoscopic  novelty  that 
might  come  of  free  and  irresponsible  wills  but  the  orderly 
novelty  of  articulated  construction.  As  a  matter  of  fact 
practically  all  men — especially  almost  all  civilized  men — live 
and  work  in  the  belief  in  cause  and  effect  as  the  highest  law 


22  PAULINE    PARSONS 

of  conduct — each  man  individually  impelled  by  the  belief  thai 
if  his  personal  efforts  cease  his  personal  results  will  not  accrue 
and  that  if  he  misses  opportunity  that  particular  opportunity 
will  never  come  again — other  opportunities  may  come — that 
certain  one  will  have  gone  by  forever.  He  knows  that  what  he 
wants  he  must  set  about  getting." 

"All  except  happiness — he  knows  that  the  best  way  to 
attain  happiness  is  not  to  set  about  getting  it,"  suggested 
Mr.  Ransom  with  sly  amusement. 

It  seemed  to  be  a  hit  and  there  was  a  general  laugh.  Mr. 
Ransom's  pronouncements  upon  ethical  theory  were  accepted 
by  his  many  admirers  as  finality. 

"At  least,  I  presume  you  are  an  evolutionary  hedonist 
and  swallow  the  paradox  with  the  rest  of  hedonist  doctrine," 
added  this  new  disputant. 

Mr.  Barlow  seemed  for  the  moment  silenced. 

"I  think  we  must  postpone  Mr.  Barlow's  reply  to  your 
suggestion,  Mr.  Ransom,  until  after  he  has  disposed  of  the 
libel-  of  materialism  and  of  Mr.  Balfour's  gloomy  picture," 
said  Barbara. 

"I  think  I  will  answer  Mr.  Ransom  now  if  you  don't 
mind.  Miss  Fleming,"  said  Mr.  Barlow  with  another  deferen- 
tial look  that  too,  was  not  lost  upon  Pauline.  Then  he  added 
with  a  laugh,  "since  it  seems  that  there  is  no  escape  for  me 
in  the  end." 

"Very  well,  Mr.  Barlow — if  it  is  more  convenient,"  per- 
mitted  Miss   Fleming. 

"Then,  Mr.  Ransom,  it  seems  to  me  that  we  attain  happi- 
ness by  going  after  it  just  as  we  obtain  other  things.  We 
enjoy  the  happiness  that  comes  from  the  indulgence  in  wine  by 
drinking  wine.  We  enjoy  the  delight  of  contemplating  our  own 
good  deeds  by  doing  good  deeds,  and  we  attain  the  greatest  joy 
of  all,  the  sympathetic  joy  in  the  happiness  of  others  brought 
about  by  our  action,  by  giving  happiness  to  others  but  just  in 
so  far  as  we  are  conscious  of  giving  happiness  to  others  for 
the  purpose  of  enhancing  our  own  happiness  we  lose  the  finest 
flavor  of  that  greatest  joy  of  all.  We  obtain  the  finest  flavor 
by  doing  the  things  which  cause  it.  So  if  we  are  conscious 
of  trying  for  the  result  we  do  not  get  the  result  because 
that  is  not. the  way  to  get  it.  That  is  all  there  is  to  the 
paradox.     It  seems  to  me  that  your  implication  that  evolu- 


PAULINE    PARSONS  28 

tionary    hedonists    must    admit    that    it    is    an    exception    to 

causation  is  ill-founded." 

"Still  the  fact  remains  that  if  you  set  about  getting  the 

highest  happiness  you  do  not  get  it,"  persisted  Mr.  Ransom. 

"Words  however  cleverly  manipulated  will  not  explain  away 

the  fact — or  alleged  fact." 

"You  state  the  fact  incorrectly,"   answered  Mr.   Barlow. 

"If  you  consciously  set  about  getting  that  which  is  a  result 

of  unconscious,  spontaneous  effort  you  will  not  get  it." 
"StiU  I—" 
"Cut  it !     Everybody  sees  it  but  you,"  said  Charles.     Like 

the  law  Charles  was  no  respecter  of  persons. 

Mr.  Ransom  looked  about  him.     Seeing  no  evidence  that 

others   were  with   him  in  desiring  further  exposition   of  the 

matter,  he  subsided. 

"Now,   Mr.   Barlow,   as   to   the   materialistic   implications 
in  the  theory  of  evolution,"  prompted  Barbara. 

"As  to  the  term  materialistic  you  must  keep  in  mind  that 
the  theory  of  evolution  has  only  to  do  with  phenomena," 
resumed  the  secretary.  "It  has  nothing  to  say  about  the 
Ultimate  and  Absolute  Reality.  Whether  you  mean  by  the 
theory  of  evolution  just  the  theory  that  all  things  phenom- 
enal, inorganic,  organic  and  super-organic,  have  evolved  and 
are  evolving  in  an  orderly  way  which  may  be  studied  and  in 
large  measure  understood  by  men ;  or  whether  you  mean 
some  particular  formula  of  evolution,  as  Spencer's ;  the 
theory  in  either  case  may  be  entertained  by  men  who  hold 
to  the  most  diverse  views,  guesses,  beliefs,  dogmas — whatever 
you  call  them — about  the  Absolute — and  even  by  one  who 
clothes  his  Absolute  in  all  kinds  of  human  attributes  and 
calls  it  a  personal  God  provided  only  that  he  adds  not  ca- 
priciousness  to  his  attributes.  It  may  be  entertained  by  the 
man  who  postulates  an  Absolute  of  some  kind  or  by  a  man 
who  postulates  that  there  is  no  Absolute  or  by  the  thorough 
going  agnostic  who  declines  to  postulate  either  that  there  is 
or  is  not  some  such  entity  behind  phenomena  or  by  a  man 
who  postulates  that  the  phenomenal  is  just  the  functioning 
of  the  Will  of  the  Absolute.  All  may  hold  to  the  theory  of 
evolution  of  things — whether  they  are  just  phenomenal  things 
or  real  things  or  only  the  unfoldings  of  the  Absolute.  Only 
they  who  postulate  a  capricious  Absolute  whether  just  a 
capricious  Absolute  Reality  or  a  capricious  personal  God  are 


24  PAULINE    PARSONS 

precluded  from  holding  to  a  belief  in  evolution  generally  and 
only  they  who  believe  in  free  will  are  precluded  from  belief  in 
the  evolution  of  man  in  his  psychical,  ethical  and  social  na- 
ture. Even  they  who  proclaim  a  priori  rules  and  set  these 
up  as  an  Absolute  of  another  kind  are  debarred  in  so  far 
only.  Because  of  their  fundamental  postulates  of  that  which 
transcends  and  lies  behind  phenomena,  if  anjrthing  does 
transcend  and  lie  behind  phenomena — or  because  of  their  re- 
fusal or  neglect  to  postulate — none  are  precluded.  It  there- 
fore seems  to  me  utterly  idle  to  call  an  evolutionist  a  ma- 
terialist— since  materialists,  idealists,  atheists,  theists,  agnos- 
tics and  every  other  kind  of  'ist'  except  capricionists  and  free 
wUlists  may  be  evolutionists.  Whether  one  is  a  materialist 
or  not  depends  upon  his  belief  or  postulate  as  to  the  Absolute 
— if  he  postulates  anything." 

"But  if  he  postulates  nothing — isn't  he  a  materialist?" 
asked  Miss  Elsingham. 

**Certainly  not.  He  may  fall  back  upon  his  admission 
that  there  may  be  an  Absolute." 

"But  how  can  you  assume  to  cram  evolution — as  applica- 
ble to  the  mind  and  soul — down  the  throat  of  the  absolute 
idealist?"   asked  Mrs.   Ransom. 

"I  don't.  But  it  is  the  only  medium  of  circulation  that 
is  at  all  acceptable  to  all  except  libertarians,  whether  it  is 
acceptable  as  hard  cash  or  only  as  fiat  money." 

"Absolute  idealists,  however,  do  discuss  the  conduct  of 
man — and  independently  of  evolution,  as  applicable  to  the 
mind  and  soul,"  persisted  Mr.  Ransom.  "I  instance  the  ethics 
of  T.  H.  Green  and  his  school.  Man's  experience  being  but 
the  unfolding  of  the  Will  of  the  Absolute  his  duty  consists  in 
self-realization  as  part  of  the  Absolute,  or,  in  terms  of  con- 
scious experience,  self-realization  as  part  of  the  Social 
Whole." 

"If  Green's  Absolute  were  not,  as  he  contends,  a  capricious 
Absolute  but  one  which  unfolded  in  accordance  with  law — 
its  own  law  if  you  will — in  an  orderly  way,  then  an  evolu- 
tionist could  have  no  quarrel  with  him — whether  or  not  he 
would  quarrel  with  the  evolutionist,"  answered  Barlow.  "The 
unfolding  being  an  orderly  one  and  pictured  in  the  conscious 
experience  of  man  we  go  right  on  studying  the  laws  of  the 
conscious  experience  of  man  including  his  necessary  conduct 
— that  is,  we  study  evolution  as  applicable  to  the  mind  and 


PAULINE    PARSONS  26 

soul  of  man.  If  the  positive  knowledge  about  man's  mental 
and  moral  development  which  we  thus  gain  is  also  knowledge 
about  the  orderly  unfoldment  of  the  Absolute  Will,  that  is 
interesting,  but  the  important  gain  is  increased  knowledge  of 
ourselves,  not  of  the  Absolute.  Again  if,  gaining  positive 
knowledge  about  moral  adjustment  of  man  to  man  and  to 
environment,  we  find  we  can  express  adjustment  in  terms  of 
self-realization  in  relation  to  the  social  whole  that  may  be  a 
convenient  form  of  expression,  but  the  important  thing  is  that 
we  have  learned  our  duty  to  ourselves  and  to  each  other  as 
individuals.  The  social  whole  apart  from  the  individuals 
which  compose  it  is  nothing — with  them  it's  nothing  more 
than  the  total  of  the  relations  between  them.  But  Green 
takes  great  pains  to  prove — ^to  his  satisfaction  and  that  of  his 
followers — that  his  Absolute  is  a  capricious  Absolute — in  the 
sense  that  the  unfoldment  of  its  Will  is  at  the  mercy  of  the 
free  will  of  its  individual  parts.  We  must  then  exclude  Green 
from  the  discussion  of  conduct  since  according  to  his  view 
there  is  nothing  to  discuss — there  being  no  order  in  conduct. 
But  he  is  excluded  not  as  an  absolute  idealist  but  as  a 
capricionist." 

"There  you  go !  You  materialists  can  see  no  order  but 
mechanical  order,"  said  Mr.  Ransom.  "You  ignore  the  power 
of  ideals.     You  cannot  see  the  ideal  order." 

"Your  last  remark  seems  to  imply  that  the  will  is  not 
free  before  the  power  of  ideals.  That  is  true  but  it  seems 
a  strange  one  for  a  capricionist  to  entertain,"  rejoined  Mr. 
Barlow.  "Evolutionists  more  than  any  others  recognize  the 
power  of  ideals — whether  such  an  one  as  the  ideal  that  we 
form  just  before  tossing  off  a  cocktail  or  that  which  moves 
us  to  relieve  suffering  or  recede  from  a  course  of  injustice. 
But  we  have  our  minds  upon  those  ideals  which  actually  do 
move  men,  ideals  of  pleasure  to  be  enjoyed  or  pain  to  be 
escaped.  We  eschew  invented  ideals  that  have  no  impelling 
effect  upon  men — such  an  one,  for  instance,  as  the  ideal  of 
self-realization  as  part  of  the  Social  Whole.  That  ideal  never 
moved  and  never  can  move  anyone  to  action — that  is  other- 
wise than  through  the  proximate  ideal  of  calculated  happiness, 
well-being,  pleasure  to  be  attained,  in  such  way,  by  the  actor." 

"Calculated  or  spontaneous,"  suggested  Barbara. 

"No,  Miss  Fleming — ^not  in  self-realization,"  insisted  Mr. 
Barlow.     "There  is  spontaneous  happiness  in  sympathy  with 


26  PAULINE    PARSONS 

the  joy  of  one  or  more  fellow  beings  but  none  in  adjustment 
to  the  idealists  Social  Whole — the  feelingless  shell." 

"Isn't  it  a  little  too  sweeping,  Barlow,  to  say  that  the 
ideal  of  self-realization  cannot  move  to  action?"  asked  Bob. 
"Granted  that  no  one  can  know  what  to  do  in  order  to 
realize  one's  self  as  part  of  a  Social  Whole  emptied  of  the 
individuals  who  compose  it;  still  the  teachers  of  the  cult  do 
point  out  what  they  say  are  the  courses  of  conduct  which 
will  result  in  or  are  the  result  of  self-realization  or  are 
coordinate  with  it.     May  we  not  be  moved  by  mistake.?" 

"True.  We  may  be  moved  by  mistake,"  answered  Mr. 
Barlow.  "But  observe  that  I  said  only  that  the  ideal  of  self- 
realization  can  move  no  one  otherwise  than  through  the  proxi- 
mate ideal  of  pleasure  for  the  actor.  Whether  we  are  moved 
by  mistaken  or  correct  practice  the  proximate  ideal  is  the 
pleasure  of  the  actor — usually  calculated  but  as  the  true 
moral  goal  is  approached  tending  to  become  spontaneous — 
ever  the  proximate  impelling  ideal  but  to  be  smothered  in 
consciousness  by  sympathy  for  others.  No  one  can  realize 
himself  or  do  anything  else,  unless  he  wants  to  and  the  very 
essence  of  wanting  to  is  the  calculated  or  spontaneous  motive 
of  self-betterment.  Whether  your  ultimate  moral  ideal  is 
self-realization  as  part  of  an  ideal  Social  Whole  or  is  the 
highest  and  most  complete  happiness  for  all  individual  men 
your  proximate  ideal  is  the  resultant  of  your  conflicting  de- 
sires— self-betterment — pleasure.  As  to  the  two  ultimate 
moral  ideals  it  may  be  left  to  the  opinion  of  mankind  which 
is  the  better;  that  of  the  absolute  idealist  barren  of  every 
thing  that  human  breasts  crave;  or  that  of  the  better  and 
ever  better  happiness  of  all — ^the  ideal  of  the  evolutionary 
hedonist." 

"Good  boy,  Barley,"  cried  Charles,  clapping  his  hands. 
**You  are  some  orator — ^believe  me." 

"Behave  yourself  Charlie  Boyd,"  commanded  Barbara. 

"I'm  behaving  myself.  Great  heavens !  What  kind  of 
a  meeting  is  this  if  a  fellow  can't  applaud.?" 

"You  were  not  applauding  seriously." 

"I  was,"  quoth  Charles.  "You  make  me  tired,  Barbara. 
You  seem  to  think  you  are  burdened  with  the  duty  of  per- 
sonally conducting  Barley  through  this  discussion.  Why 
Pauline — " 

But  here  he  caught  a  warning  glance  from  Pauline. 


PAULINE    PARSONS  27 


III 


"Let's  see,"  said  Barbara,  undisturbed.  "I  think  we  have 
strayed  from  the  subject  of  the  materialistic  aspect  of  evo- 
lution." 

"To  come  back  to  that  topic,  Mr.  Barlow,"  said  Mr. 
Walthall,  "let  me  suggest  that  there  are  those  who  believe 
that  life,  intelligence,  the  soul,  are  mere  functions  of  matter, 
have  evolved  from  matter.  There  has  been  some  question 
whether  Spencer  did  not  hold  to  this  opinion  or  hypothesis  as 
a  tenable  scientific  hypothesis.  At  least  it  would  come  within 
the  domain  of  the  phenomenal — it  is  often  stated  that  there 
will  be  forthcoming  scientific  demonstration  of  it.  But  can 
you  successfully  maintain  that  one  who  holds  such  an  hypothe- 
sis is  not  a  materialist?" 

"If  it  should  turn  out  to  be  a  fact  it  would  be  a  fact 
whether  materialistic  in  its  implication  or  not,"  suggested 
Bob. 

"Of  course.  I  am  not  a  pragmatist.  My  reading  leads 
me  to  pretty  much  the  same  general  conclusions  as  those  which 
Mr.  Barlow  has  outlined.  But  I  confess  that  the  establish- 
ing of  such  a  fact  would,  it  seems  to  me,  have  a  materialistic 
implication  and  speaking  for  myself,  it  would  have  a  very 
depressing  effect." 

"We  biologists  do  not  cross  our  bridges  until  we  come 
to  them,"  suggested  Professor  Mann  in  a  superior  manner. 

"Not  being  biologists,  but  just  human  in  our  weaknesses, 
neither  do  we,  Professor,"  replied  Mr.  Walthall  good- 
humorcdly.  "But  we  confess  to  a  curiosity  about  the  bridges. 
I  should  like  to  hear  what  Mr.  Barlow  has  to  say  about  it — 
whether  he  thinks  there  is  a  bridge  or  that  we  shall  have  to 
plunge  into  the  cold  stream." 

"What  do  you  say,  Mr.  Barlow?"  asked  Mrs.  Lurton,  who 
was  as  deeply  concerned  about  this  point  as  about  Mr.  Bal- 
four's gloomy  picture  of  dissolution. 

"There  is  a  bridge  for  me,"  replied  the  secretary,  "and 
for  all  who  see  in  materialism  a  mere  spectre.  Suppose  it  be 
actually  established  that  life,  intelligence,  soul  have  evolved 
from   matter — what   is   established?      Simply   that   matter    is 


28  PAULINE    PARSONS 

capable  of  taking  such  form  as  to  be  conscious  of  itself.  Its 
conscious  experience  then  is  just  conscious  experience — the 
succession  of  states  of  consciousness — just  appearance,  phe- 
nomenal. We  are  no  nearer  to  the  Absolute  or  wiser  about 
it  than  before — we  still  see  it  through  the  veil  of  the  mind. 
We  cannot  now  any  more  than  before  push  the  mind  to  one 
side  and  look  directly  upon  that  which  may  cause  conscious 
changes — the  Absolute  Reality  or  whatever  you  may  call  it — 
if  there  is  any  such  Reality.     Then — " 

"Oh,  but  there  you  give  your  whole  case  away,  Mr.  Bar- 
low," broke  in  Mrs.  Lurton.  "After  relying  upon  the  Abso- 
lute Reality  to  save  us  from  the  spectre  of  materialism  now 
you  speak  as  if  there  may  be  no  Absolute  Reality!" 

"I  have  to  look  all  the  possibilities  in  the  face  even  if  one 
of  them  does  destroy  my  case,"  replied  Mr.  Barlow.  "While 
the  theory  of  evolution  does  not  deny  the  Absolute  neither 
does  it  require  it.  Then  the  question  arises  whether,  if  there 
is  no  Absolute  behind  phenomena — if  matter  is  just  what  it 
appears  to  be — stone,  iron,  carbon,  atoms,  electrons,  and  not 
the  manifestations  of  an  Absolute  Reality — and  if,  further, 
it  later  becomes  scientifically  certain  that  mind,  intelligence, 
soul  are  just  functions  of  such  gross,  real,  matter — then,  I 
say,  the  question  arises  whether,  in  such  case,  the  implication 
of  evolution  is  materialistic.  I  think  it  is.  But  so  is  it  of 
every  other  theory  of  the  nature  of  things.  Under  the  sup- 
position materialism  is  an  implication  of  the  facts — no  more 
binding  upon  an  evolutionist  than  on  any  other  observer  or 
dreamer.  But  a  belief  in  the  materialistic  nature  of  things 
would  be  unfortunate.  Though  the  spur  to  right  doing  would 
not  be  dulled,  though  the  moral  goal  towards  which  evolution 
points  would  still  be  our  goal,  so  long  as  man  inhabited  the 
earth,  still  a  great  deal  of  the  joy  of  life  would  be  taken 
away  and  an  end  would  be  made  to  the  hope  of  immortality. 
Fortunately  wie  do  not  have  to  accept  the  supposition  as  true 
— and  never  shall  have  to  accept  it  as  true.  Should  science 
prove  that  mind  is  just  a  function  of  matter  we  shall  have  to 
accept  that  as  true — to  deny  it  would  be  just  to  hide  our 
heads  ostrich-like  in  the  sand.  But  we  will  never  have  to 
admit  that  appearance  is  reality.  We  can  never  push  the 
veil  of  the  mind  aside  even  so  much  as  to  see  that  it  is  not  a 
veil — that  there  is  nothing  behind  it.  While  we  have  no  right 
to  postulate  the  Absolute  as  positive  knowledge  upon  which 


PAULINE    PARSONS  29 

to  found  systems  of  ethics  or  other  rules  for  the  guidance  of 
man,  we  have  a  right  to  personal  religious  belief  in  such  an 
existence  and  that  appearance  is  but  its  manifestations.  Nor 
does  this  appeal  to  meliorism  as  a  criterion  of  emotional 
belief  about  that  of  which  we  have  and  can  have  no  posi- 
tive knowledge — any  more  than  the  arbitrariness  in  the  form 
in  which  science  frames  positive  truth — propose  meliorism  or 
fniitfulness  as  a  proper  criterion  of  substantive,  positive 
truth.  But  in  that  domain  into  which  science  can  never  in- 
trude— ^the  domain  of  the  Unknowable,  behind  the  veil — the 
appeal  to  meliorism  as  a  criterion  of  faith  is  a  legitimate  one." 

"I  fear,  Mr.  Barlow,  that  biology  can  lend  no  support 
to  the  postulate  of  the  Absolute.  The  interpretations  of  con- 
sciousness are  real  and  the  only  knowledge  we  can  have." 

"I  postulate  nothing  as  to  the  Absolute,"  replied  Mr. 
Barlow.  "I  am  a  thoroughgoing  agnostic  and  I  thought  I 
had  made  it  plain  that  I  believe  the  interpretations  of  con- 
sciousness to  constitute  the  only  knowledge  we  can  have.  But 
there  is  a  difference  between  knowledge  and  faith.  If  you 
assert  that  the  interpretations  of  consciousness  are  real  then 
it  is  you  who  postulates.  If  biologists  have  any  evidence  of 
such  a  proposition,  then,  high  as  has  been  my  admiration  for 
biologists  it  has  fallen  far  short  of  their  deserts  for  they 
are  not  merely  great  scientists — they  are  nothing  less  than 
magicians." 

At  which  Mr.  Walthall  laughed  quietly  but  with  every 
evidence  of*  satisfaction.  It  was  evident  too  that  the  rest  of 
the  company,  including  those  who  had  crossed  swords  with  him 
earlier  in  the  discussion  sympathized  with  Mr.  Barlow  in  his 
position  against  the  biologist. 

"It  does  you  fellows  good  to  get  a  jolt  now  and  then," 
said  the  economist. 

At  which  Professor  Mann  merely  shrugged  his  shoulders 
— it  was  useless  to  argue  with  one  who  was  not  a  biologist. 

"But  how  can  you  say  that  a  materialistic  belief  would 
mt  dull  the  spur  to  right  doing,  Mr.  Barlow?"  asked  Miss 
Elsack. 

"Since  Mr.  Barlow  has  proved  that  the  theory  of  evolu- 
tion is  not  materialistic  and  that  no  one  need  run  away  from 
any  positive  truth  whatever  for  fear  of  the  materialistic 
bogie,  he  need  not  answer  that  question,"  said  Barbara  in 
judicial   manner.      "But — " 


80  PAULINE    PARSONS 

There  was  a  general  laugh  at  this  sustained  claim  of  right 
to  guide  the  discussion  with  a  firm  hand. 

"Order!"  she  cried.  "We  have  to  limit  the  discussion. 
But  I  think  it  would  be  interesting  to  have  Mr.  Barlow's 
answer  to  Miss  Elsack's  question — if  he  is  willing  to  answer." 

"But  I  asked  a  question  sometime  ago  that  is  still  un- 
anwered,"   protested   one. 

"And  so  did  I,"  said  another. 

"And  I  want  to  know  too — how  does  Mr.  Barlow,  ma- 
terialist or  no,  get  away  from  Mr.  Balfour's  picture  of  dis- 
solution after  evolution  has  run  its  course.""'  said  Mrs.  Lurton. 

"Why  may  we  not  found  a  system  of  ethics  upon  the 
nature  of  the  Absolute.-'  You  cannot  push  a  system  such  as 
Green's  to  one  side  with  a  mere  manifesto."  This  from  Mr. 
Ransom. 

"To  me  ethics  has  to  do  with  men's  souls  and  therefore 
reaches  beyond  the  veil — mere  worldly  experience  is  not  a 
sufficiently  broad  basis   for  it,"  said  Miss  Elsingham. 

"Mercy !  We  have  enough  matter  for  discussion  to  keep 
us  here  all  night,"  exclaimed  Barbara.  "I  guess  we  shall  have 
to  cut  out  your  question,  Miss  Elsack." 

"But  if  Mr.  Barlow  can  explain  why  a  materialistic 
philosophy  would  not  dull  the  spur  to  right  doing  it  would, 
it  seems  to  me,  throw  some  light  on  the  other  difficulties," 
persisted  Miss  Elsack. 

"What  do  you  say  Mr.  Barlow.?"  asked  Barbara. 

"There  must  be  others  here  who  can  answer  these  ques- 
tions so  much  more  clearly  than  I  can — I  ought  not  to  be 
made  to  monopolize  the  conversation — really — " 

Mr.  Barlow  cast  another  look  of  inquiry  toward  the  girl 
at  the  head  of  the  table. 

"The  company  is  interested,  Mr.  Barlow,"  said  Pauline, 
with  another  cold  little  smile.  "I  really  think  that  you  must 
put  aside  your  modesty  and  do  your  part." 

"Put  aside  my  modesty!"  repeated  Mr.  Barlow  to  him- 
self. "And  here  I  have  been  doing  most  of  the  talking  for  an 
hour!  Satire!  I  never  would  have  thought  it  of  her.  Well, 
the  only  thing  to  do  is  to  go  on.  Perhaps  some  lucky  turn 
may  start  them  into  general  conversation  again.  It  would 
have  come  about  some  time  ago  but  for  this  pestiferously 
persistent  moderator." 


PAULINE    PARSONS  81 

"Come,  Mr.  Barlow,  we  are  waiting,"  urged  the  pestifer- 
ously persistent  one. 

"It  seems  to  me  then,"  he  began,  "that  the  relation  of  the 
soul  to  ethics,  the  relative  advantage  of  speculation  about  the 
Absolute  and  of  generalization  from  experience  as  a  founda- 
tion for  ethics  and  the  lack  of  effect  on  right  doing  of  a 
materialistic  philosophy  may  all  be  answered  together.  I 
will  do  the  best  I  can.  The  fundamental  thing  to  note  is 
that  what  does  guide  our  conduct  is  our  desires.  Owing  to 
the  necessity  of  adjusting  ourselves  to  our  social  environment, 
that  is  of  living  together  in  a  society  which  is  growing  more 
and  more  complex,  and  owing  to  the  greater  power  this  com- 
plex social  life  gives  us  to  represent  to  ourselves  painfully 
and  pleasurably  the  sorrows  and  joys  of  our  fellow-beings 
and  our  own  postponed  harm  and  welfare,  we  are  gradually 
coming  to  be  moved  by  desires  which  take  greater  and  greater 
account  of  the  welfare  of  others  and  our  own  postponed  wel- 
fare. The  result  is  that  we  find  ourselves  upon  an  infinite 
journey  towards  that  moral  goal  where  there  will  be  no  pain 
and  no  evil  where  'duty  will  become  synonymous  with  pleas- 
ure' and  'right  conduct  will  become  instinctive  and  spon- 
taneous.' There  is  nothing  new  in  all  this — it  is  familiar  to 
you  and  I  just  restate  it  as  the  basis  of  the  answer  to  the 
three  questions.  I  can  answer  yours  now.  Miss  Elsack. 
Materialistic  belief  could  in  no  way  affect  the  confirmed  habit 
of  man  to  seek  pleasure  and  avoid  pain — if  it  did  it  would 
just  destroy  the  race,  not  dull  its  morals.  Given  that  life- 
preserving  habit,  moral  progress  is  certain.  Please  remember, 
Miss  Elsack,  that  I  am  just  defending  a  chance  remark  I 
made  about  materialism — not  defending  materialism.  Let  me 
repeat — emphatically — that  no  man  at  any  time  need  turn 
his  back  on  any  teaching  of  science  for  fear  that  it  leads  to 
materialism.  It  cannot  lead  to  materialism  for  any  man  who 
holds  to  the  melioristic  faith  in  an  Ultimate  and  Absolute 
Reality  beyond  the  reach  of  science.  But — and  here  is  the 
answer  to  your  question.  Miss  Elsingham, — the  things  that 
man  has  to  do  with  in  this  existence  on  this  earth  are  the 
things  that  science  has  to  do  with.  It's  no  business  of  men 
to  save  their  souls.  Their  duty  and  growing  pleasure  is  to 
love  their  neighbors  as  themselves  and  act  accordingly — hav- 
ing due  regard  to  the  kind  of  neighbor — to  be  just  and  honest, 
to  vote  right  and  to  do  just  such  other  concrete  things   as 


82  PAULINE    PARSONS 

conscience  in  the  light  of  latest  information  orders.  If  in- 
cidentally our  souls  are  saved  so  much  the  better.  They  are 
very  much  more  likely  to  be  saved  in  that  way  than  by 
conduct  primarily  intended  to  save  them.  There  is  another 
*paradox.'  In  short,  though  the  soul  reaches  on  beyond  the 
veil — I  believe  that — our  duty  is  here  and  now  along  lines 
which  may  be  determined  here  and  now  from  our  experiences 
here  and  now  and  past.  Neglect  the  teachings  of  earthly  and 
finite  experience  for  vain  guesses  about  the  purposes  of  the 
Unknowable  Ultimate  and  Absolute  Reality  beyond  the  veil 
and  you  do  so  not  for  the  good — it  seems  to  me — but  at  the 
peril  of  your  soul.  And  the  answer  to  your  question,  Mr. 
Ransom,  is  but  little  different.  Based  upon  a  crude  and  little 
understood  experience,  we  have  conscience — that  outgrowth 
of  rules  of  thumb  about  right  conduct.  As  with  more  ex- 
perience we  come  to  better  understand  what  makes  for  the 
welfare  of  the  individual  and  society — meaning  by  society  not 
an  ideal  entity  but  the  individuals  of  which  it  is  composed — 
we  will  direct  a  more  searching  gaze  upon  those  rules  of 
thumb  and  whip  them  into  more  accurate  rules  of  reason ;  to 
which  the  conscience  will  give  a  more  ungrudging,  unques- 
tioning sanction  than  it  ever  gave  the  rules  of  thumb  within 
which  it  has  grown.  But  the  welfare  of  men  has  to  do,  now, 
just  with  finite  existence  on  this  earth — about  his  welfare  be- 
yond the  veil  we  know  nothing.  So  we  have  at  hand  in  our 
finite  experience  all  that  is  needed  to  teach  us,  though  slowly, 
what  makes  for  the  welfare  of  each  and  all.  Have  we  any 
right  to  trifle  with  the  welfare  of  men  by  allowing  presump- 
tuous guessers  about  the  Absolute  to  impose  their  pronounce- 
ments of  duty  upon  us  if  their  pronouncements  are  at  variance 
with  the  teachings  of  our  growing  experience?" 

"Emphatically,  no !"  said  Lovering.  "Besides  trifling 
with  the  welfare  of  men  it  would  amount  to  establishing  a 
new  hierarchy  in  control  of  men's  consciences.  Even  now  in 
this  twentieth  century  you  find  cultivated — if  not  intelligent 
— men — or  perhaps  mostly  women — giving  their  consciences 
into  the  control  of  the  priests  of  new  revelations.  Fortu- 
nately, the  overwhelming  mass  of  men  are  well  founded  in  the 
plain  teachings  of  experience  that  good  or  bad  conduct  has  to 
do  with  the  well  being  of  individuals  on  this  earth." 

"And  still  more  fortunately  this,"  added  Mr.  Barlow. 
"Regardless   of  theory   it   is   the  ideal   of  the   well   being  of 


PAULINE    PARSONS  33 

individuals  that  in  fact  does  move  us.  And  though  we  do, 
still,  personify  the  Church,  the  State,  the  City,  Labor, 
Capital,  we  are  becoming  more  and  more  inquisitive  about 
the  individuals  connoted  by  these  personifications." 

"We  are  disposed  to  find  the  nigger  in  the  wood-pile," 
suggested  Charles. 

"That's  it,  Charles,"  said  Mr.  Barlow.  "So  it  is  reason- 
able to  hope  that  though  it  is  said  that  the  Common  Good  of 
the  Social  Whole  has  no  individual  beneficiaries,  we  shall  want 
to  know  whether  it  has  not  in  fact  some  secret  beneficiaries,  or 
at  least  may  not  readily  come  to  be  the  agency  of  secret  bene- 
ficiaries— granting  that  at  present  it  may  be  entertained  as 
an  unselfish  if  meaningless  ideal." 

"But  you  are  wrong  in  saying  that  there  are  no  benefi- 
ciaries of  the  Common  Good  of  the  Social  Whole.  Its  bene- 
ficiaries are  all  men,"  answered  Mr.  Ransom. 

"Then  hedonists  can  have  no  quarrel  with  the  Common 
Good.  For  it  means  the  same  as  the  highest  happiness  of  all. 
The  only  test  we  have  of  benefits  is  to  reckon  them  in  happi- 
ness. The  only  question  between  us  then  is  how  are  we  going 
to  determine  the  Common  Good — the  highest  happiness? 
Shall  we  take  someone's  authoritative  statement  about  it-f*  Or 
shall  we  go  on  slowly  but  surely  working  it  out  through  the 
interplay  of  egoistic  and  altruistic  impulses,  aided  by  ad- 
vancing knowledge  and  wider  sympathies  growing  out  of  more 
and  more  complex  experience.''  Whatever  may  be  the  theory, 
the  latter  will  be  the  way  we  actually  will  determine  it — 
unless — " 

"Unless.?" 

"Unless  a  wide-spread  disgust  with  the  pseudo-individual- 
ism which  is  masquerading  as  individualism  should  dispose  men 
to  accept  temporarily  authority  as  their  guide  and  a  fetich 
as  a  substitute  for  sympathy  and  knowledge — in  sheer  des- 
pair of  the  ability  of  democracy  to  work  out  its  just  ends. 
The  same  evils  which  tend  to  make  men  socialists  in  economics 
might,  conceivably,  make  them  the  slaves  of  a  plausible  cult, 
well  designed — through  its  pronouncements  by  authority — to 
become  a  new  cloak  for  old  exploitation." 


84  PAULINE    PARSONS 


IV 

"You  refer  to  the  failure  of  individualism,"  supplemented 
Miss  Elsack. 

"So  phrased — ^but  better  phrased  as  the  success  of  fake- 
individualism — its  too  inveterate  hold  upon  its  privileges. 
Individualism  is  something  we  are  working  towards — but  have 
not  as  yet  enjoyed  except  for  brief  intervals  and  in  outlying 
spots  of  civilization.  The  history  of  the  world  has  been  the 
history  of  the  exploitation  of  the  weak,  the  meek,  the  gener- 
ous, the  patriotic,  and  I  have  to  add  the  cowardly  and  igno- 
rant by  governments  for  the  benefit  of  the  selfish  few  who 
have  made  it  their  business  to  be  the  government  or  to  control 
government.  We  can  only  attain  true  individualism  by  tak- 
ing government  out  of  its  partnership  with  individuals — so 
that  it  won't  pay  selfish  schemers  to  make  the  effort  to  control 
it.  It  is  the  magnificence  of  the  prizes  that  have  been  gained 
and  are  still  to  be  gained  through  the  control  of  government 
that  makes  it  so  difficult  to  shake  off  the  evils  which  are 
nursing  socialism  and  its  appropriate  ethic." 

"Are  you  a  follower  of  Nietzsche,  Mr.  Barlow?"  asked 
Mrs.  Orton,  in  such  evident  sincerity  that  Mr.  Crandall  shot 
a  look  of  astonished  inquiry  in  her  direction. 

"Doesn't  she  know  about  him?"  he  asked  himself. 

"Indeed  no,  Mrs.  Orton.  I  can  think  of  no  man  of  whose 
views  I  can  say  with  more  enthusiasm  *I  dissent.'  " 

"I  gathered  from  your  previous  remarks  that  you  were  an 
individualist,"  rejoined  Mrs.  Orton  serenely  unconscious  that 
she  was  fencing  with  her  niece's  secretary. 

"I  am,"  said  Mr.  Barlow,  laughing,  "but  I  take  the  liberty 
of  reading  Nietzsche  out  of  the  party.  His  is  the  brand  of 
fake-individualism  which  preceded  the  present  commercial 
brand.  It  is  several  centuries  out  of  date.  It  belongs  to  the 
era  of  feudalism  when  bullies  and  schemers  made  it  their 
business  to  be  the  government.  Now  the  best  they  can  do — 
at  least  in  our  country — is  to  control  the  government  and 
that  not  continuously.  Nietzsche's  individualism  is  the  in- 
dividualism of  the  determined  self-seeker  in  a  race  of  docile 


PAULINE    PARSONS  35 

slaves.  To  Americans  it  can  be  but  a  curiosity.  Here  democ- 
racy has  too  firm  a  hold — and  is  making  it  firmer." 

*'That  is,  your  individualism  favors  a  large  measure  of 
collective  control  and  standardization — at  least  looks  forward 
to  it,"  suggested  Professor  Walthall. 

"Control,  yes,  but  not  much  standardization,  and  control 
as  means,  not  as  an  end;  and  as  a  means  to  a  particular  end, 
individual  freedom,"  answered  Mr.  Barlow.  "Even  if  our 
end  were  efficiency — and  it  is  not — it  would  be  folly  to  curb 
competition — that  is,  to  standardize — until  there  appeared  to 
be  some  perfection  in  sight.  I  don't  see  any  perfection 
around.  But  our  true  end  is  individual  freedom — because 
happiness  is  an  individual  thing,  not  a  collective  thing.  But 
we  cannot  have  more  individual  freedom  than  will  hang  to- 
gether and  the  cement  that  binds  it — pending  character 
growth — is  collective  control,  and,  where  necessary,  collective 
effort.  We  need  the ,>  cement  but  we  need  to  remember  that  the 
structural  material  is  the  individual's  right  to  the  pursuit  of 
happiness ;  and  as  he  sees  it,  not  as  some  other  sees  it  for 
him." 

"But  are  not  the  majority  of  us  always  wrong,  as  Ruskin 
says.'"'  asked  Miss  Elsingham.  "Do  we  not  need  leaders  to 
point  out  the  best  good  of  the  whole.'"' 

"The  majority  of  us  are  always  wrong  about  art  and 
usually  wrong  about  how  to  accomplish  what  we  want,  but 
always  right  about  what  we  want.  We  may  need  leaders  to 
*show  us' — I  mean  the  full  strength  of  the  slang  expression — 
how  to  accomplish  what  we  want.  But  when  you  have  a 
people  reduced  to  such  docility  as  to  sacrifice  their  individual 
happiness  to  the  good  of  a  whole  not  determined  by  themselves 
but  by  some  overbearing  dominant  will  then  there  is  no  length 
of  madness  to  which  they  may  not  be  driven." 

"But  democracy  must  organize  or  it  will  succumb  to  the 
superior  organization  of  rival  political  systems,"  Mr.  Ransom 
suggested. 

"By  all  means  let  it  organize.  That  is  different  from 
being  organized.  Whenever  we  hear  a  man  speak  of  democ- 
racies being  organized  we  may  put  it  down  that  he  does  not 
know  what  democracy  is.  We  have  even  heard  Germany 
spoken  of  as  a  democracy;  because — if  it  is  true — all  alike, 
rich  and  poor,  noble  and  peasant,  have  to  make  equal  sacri- 
fice to  *one  great  purpose.'      To  such   observers   democracy 


86  PAULINE    PARSONS 

means  equal  burdens.  Equal  benefits  do  not  seem  to  them  to 
be  of  any  importance ;  nor  what  the  one  great  purpose  is ; 
nor   whose    arbitrary    purpose." 

"I  fear,  Mr.  Barlow,"  interposed  Professor  Hardy,  "your 
patriotism — and  permit  me  to  say  that  though  it  is  very 
refreshing,  it  seems  to  me  also  rather  naive — leads  you  to 
idealize  the  American  form  of  democracy — to  the  disparage- 
ment of  other  forms." 

"The  forms  based  on  equal  burdens  only.'*"  asked  Barlow. 
"I  am  willing  to  stake  my  reputation  for  hard-headedness 
upon  my  rejection  of  democracies  of  that  kind.  But  I  do 
not  idealize  the  American  form  of  democracy  because  I  do 
not  believe  that  even  we  have  as  yet  attained  that  form  of 
government — though  we  are  likely  to  be  the  first  to  attain  it." 

"Not  a  democracy,  Mr.  Barlow!"  exclaimed  Miss  Elsing- 
ham. 

"No — not  while  our  purposes  arc  subject  to  the  veto  of 
say  nine  judges  not  directly  responsible  to  us  who  have  arro- 
gated to  themselves  under  the  name  of  'loose  construction' 
the  power  to  amend  a  written  constitution.  Before  we  can 
call  our  form  of  government  real  democracy  we  must  either 
make  these  judges  responsible  to  us  or  shift  the  power  of 
amendment  into  the  exclusive  and  unmistakable  charge  of  a 
representative  body." 

"Elect  the  Supreme  Court!"  exclaimed  Crandall  in  a  tone 
of  shocked  surprise. 

"Not  necessarily — if  it  is  to  be  exclusively  a  court.  But 
ff  it  is  to  continue  to  be  a  constitutional  convention  it  seems 
to  me  that  that  reform  is   inevitable." 

"But  the  Supreme  Court  has  repeatedly  declared  that  the 
Constitution  speaks  today  in  the  same  terms  as  when  it  was 
adopted.  The  Court  has  simply  applied  its  abiding  princi- 
ples to  new  conditions." 

"A  convenient  fiction — on  a  par  with  the  fiction  that 
judicial  expansion  of  the  common  law  is  the  common  law. 
But,  fiction  or  not,  expansion  of  the  common  law  in  the  ab- 
sence of  statute  is  a  function  proper  to  a  court;  expansion 
of  a  constitution  is  not — that  is  in  a  democracy." 

"But  it  seems  to  me,  Mr.  Barlow,"  persisted  Mr.  Ransom, 
"that  there  is  a  strong  tendency  amongst  thinking  people 
towards  the  democratic  ideal  of  equal  submission  of  all  to  'one 
great  purpose.'  " 


PAULINE    PARSONS  87 

"If  under  the  influence  of  disengenuous  or  tender-minded 
Germanophiles  we  ever  retrograte  to  the  German  type  of 
intelligence  so  far  as  to  lose  the  substance  of  democracy — 
equal  benefits  as  well  as  equal  burdens,  real  benefits,  not  fetich 
benefits — I  think  it  is  nevertheless  safe  to  believe  that  we 
shall  never  lose  the  form — nominal  control  of  the  bureaucracy. 
We  shall  never  again  throw  our  caps  in  the  air  and  huzza 
for  the  king.  You  have  only  to  note  how  the  popular  hero 
drops  out  of  view  after  he  has  pitched  a  few  losing  games, 
or  said  or  done  a  few  unpopular  or  tactless  things  to  realize 
how  impersonal  is  our  admiration  for  men.  With  at  least 
nominal  control  of  the  beaureaucracy — the  real  special  bene- 
ficiary of  the  *one  great  purpose'  or  else  the  conduit  through 
which  the  special  beneficiaries  receive  their  benefits — we  shall 
always  be  in  an  advantageous  position  to  take  up  again  the 
forward  movement." 

"But  you  do  not  really,  look  for  any  such  retrogression!" 
exclaimed  Charles  Boyd. 

"It's  too  much  like  prophecy  either  to  look  for  it  or  to 
shut  one's  eyes  to  the  possibility  of  temporary  softening  of 
the  brain.  Progress  does  not  run  in  a  straight  line.  It's 
easier  to  locate  the  straight  line  from  the  curve  than  to  locate 
the  next  turn  of  the  curve." 

"Modern  research  in  Mendelism  brings  out  not  the  least 
evidence  of  the  gradual  evolution  of  masses  of  men,"  here 
interrupted  Professor  Mann. 

"And  what  is  your  inference.  Professor?"  inquired  Mr. 
Barlow. 

"That  they  tend  to  degenerate  rather  than  progress — that 
the  fate  of  democracy  hangs  upon  the  character  of  its 
leaders." 

**If  you  will  excuse  my  frankness,  Professor,  it  seems  to 
me  that  biologists  should  be  less  catholic  in  their  conclusions. 
Or  if  they  will  make  formulas  about  masses  of  men  they 
should  check  up  their  biology  with  history.  If  I  have  read 
history  to  any  purpose  there  are  two  things  that  stick  out 
of  it — ^the  gradual  improvement  in  the  morals  of  mankind  and 
the  gradual  assumption  of  masses  of  men  to  drive  their  so- 
called  leaders  before  them.  The  would-be  leader  of  today 
who  does  not  keep  his  ear  to  the  ground  is  a  foregone 
failure." 

"He  would  be  a  joke,"  added  Bob. 


233473 


88  PAULINE    PARSONS 

"Nevertheless  there  is  a  feeling  in  the  chancellories  of 
Europe  that  our  experiment  in  government  is  doomed  to 
fail,"  said  Mr.  Puff,  "and  because  of  that  very  lack  of  disci- 
pline— that  resentfulness  of  the  masses  against  anything  that 
looks  like  leadership,  independent   leadership." 

"It  is  in  the  chancellories  of  Europe,  if  anywhere,  that 
you  would  look  for  that  mournful  feeling,  Mr.  Puff,"  replied 
Mr.  Barlow  with  a  smile. 

"The  opinions  of  trained  administrators  is  not  to  be 
sneered  at,"  protested  Mr.  Puff. 

"They  are  no  doubt  valuable  as  to  men  who  are  willing 
to  be  'administered'  but  they  are  not  so  valuable  as  to  men 
who  are  gradually,  if  somewhat  fitfully,  learning  the  game 
themselves." 

"But—" 

"I  think,  Mr.  Puff,"  interrupted  the  ruthless  moderator, 
**that  we  all  understand  the  difference  in  the  view  points  of 
yourself  and  Mr.  Barlow.  It  would  do  no  good  to  thresh 
the  matter  further." 

"But,  Barbara,  would  Mr.  Barlow  deny  that  discipline 
is  necessary  to  progress,"  demanded  Mrs.  Orton. 

"What  do  you  say,  Mr.  Barlow.?"  questioned  the  moder- 
ator. 

"Self-discipline  is  necessary  to  progress,  Mrs.  Orton,"  said 
Mr.  Barlow.  "But  discipline  imposed  by  others  may  bring 
the  very  antithesis  of  progress.  At  best — when  properly  im- 
posed— it  is  a  mere  stop-gap,  pending  the  moral  growth  of 
individuals  to  the  requirements  of  their  social  environment, 
and  tending  to  check  that  growth." 

"To  return  to  the  subject  of  socialism.  Miss  Fleming," 
said  Miss  Elsack,  "I  would  like  to  ask  Mr.  Barlow  if  it  will 
cure  the  evils  why  oppose  it.^*" 

"Let  it  come — in  so  far  as  it  is  a  cure — if  we  cannot  rid 
ourselves  of  fake-individualism  in  any  other  way,"  replied  the 
secretary.  "The  essence  of  individualism,  after  all,  is  not 
economic  but  moral.  We  can  for  mutual  benefit  give  up  the 
right — or  privilege — of  each  to  accumulate  as  much  property 
as  he  wants  in  any  way  he  can  and  still  retain  the  essential, 
fundamental  right  to  moral  independence — the  right  of  each 
to  work  out  his  own  moral  salvation  or  go  to  the  devil  in  any 
way  he  pleases.  But  I  don't,  myself,  see  how  there  can  be 
moral  independence  under  a  government  which  controls  all  the 


PAULINE    PARSONS  39 

means  of  livelihood — either  directly  or  through  regulated  cor- 
porations. The  reason  I  say  let  socialism  come  is  because  it 
will  come — in  so  far  as  we  do  not  otherwise  get  rid  of  the 
evils.  In  the  future  as  in  the  past  the  desire  to  put  an  end  to 
the  special  privileges  which  crop  out  of  government  partner- 
ship with  those  who  control  it  will  raise  in  some  cases  the 
ideal  of  a  government  which  is  the  partner  of  none  and  in 
others  the  ideal  of  a  government  which  is  the  partner  of  all. 
Between  these  two  extremes  of  political  thought  it  seems  to  me 
the  great  mass  of  men  will  vote  as  practical  opportunists  and 
the  two  ideals  working  alternately  or  together  will  evolve  the 
state  of  the  future — a  state  in  which  there  will  be  a  larger 
measure  of  government  ownership  of  some  agencies  of  pro- 
duction and  government  interference  with  some  individual  ac- 
tivities, and,  on  the  other  hand,  a  larger  measure  of  non- 
interference with  other  agencies  and  other  activities — in  short 
organized  individualism.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  more  stub- 
bornly privilege  hangs  on  the  more  government  we  shall  have. 
Corporations  breed  bureaucracies.  An  impatient  despair  of 
the  ability  of  democracy  to  rid  itself  of  dollar  diplomacy,  dollar 
politics  and  dollar  standards  in  general  might  not  only  lead 
men  to  vote  long  steps  towards  socialism  in  economics  but  also 
throw  them  into  temporary  moral  insanity — causing  them  to 
give  a  kind  of  religious  adhesion  to  the  Common  Good  of  the 
Social  Whole.  As  a  new  fetich  it  would  be  all  the  more  attrac- 
tive to  a  diseased  public  mind  because  emotionless  and  vaguely 
supposed  to  be  founded  upon  a  philosophy  of  imposing  empti- 
ness." 

"But  what  do  you  mean  by  temporary  insanity.'"'  asked 
Mr.  Walthall.  "Would  not  insanity  of  that  kind  be  more  or 
less  permanent — come  to  look  like  sanity.?" 

"The  insanity  would  last  just  as  long  as  the  rank  and  file 
of  men  found  supreme  pleasure  in  sacrificing  every  other  pleas- 
ure to  the  alleged  good  of  an  emotionless  Social  Whole.  But 
this  pleasure  would  eventually  pall  upon  them  and  they  would 
begin  again  to  compare  rations  and  hours  of  work  and  hours 
of  leisure;  to  get  back  again  to  the  things  that  can  be  meas- 
ured in  individual  experience   and  individual   feeling." 

"There,  Mr.  Barlow,  you  use  the  word  experience  again, 
but  where  do  you  make  any  allowance  for  spiritual  experience, 
psychical  experience?"  asked  Mrs.  Hardy.  "I  cannot  see  but 
that  you  ignore  a  wide  field  of  experience — especially  in  con- 


40  PAULINE    PARSONS 

nection  with  your  statement,  a  few  minutes  ago,  that  we  have 
at  hand  in  our  finite  experience  all  that  is  needed  to  teach  us 
what  makes  for  the  welfare  of  each  and  all." 

"Reported  psychical  experiences  which  can  be  subjected  to 
the  observation  or  experiment  of  others  ought  not  to  be  ex- 
cluded, Mrs.  Hardy,"  said  Mr.  Barlow.  "But  if  they  do  not 
fit  into  the  body  of  our  more  or  less  well  established  knowledge 
— especially  if  they  contradict  such  fundamentals  as  the  law 
of  causation  and  the  uniformity  of  nature,  the  evidence  upon 
which  thdy  rest  must  be  regarded  with  suspicion." 

"But  people  sneer  and  refuse  to  observe.  We  can  lead  the 
horse  to  water  but  we  cannot  make  him  drink." 

"You  cannot  make  him  drink  what  seems  to  him  imaginary 
water — especially  if  he  has  already  had  his  fill  of  real  water. 
Since  I  know  that  I  can  go  from  Essex  Head  to  Boston  by 
train  you  cannot  blame  me  if  I  do  not  take  a  great  deal  of 
interest  in  the  rumor  that  there  is  a  man  in  town  who  has  a 
magic  carpet." 

That  the  company  in  general  was  not  much  concerned 
about  evidence  of  a  private  and  mystical  kind  which  could  not 
be  spread  upon  the  records  was  indicated  by  a  ripple  of 
laughter  following  Mr.  Barlow's  illustrations. 


"You  spoke  a  few  moments  ago,  Mr.  Barlow,  of  conscience 
giving  a  more  unquestioning,  ungrudging  sanction  to  new  rules 
of  reason  than  to  the  old  rules  of  thumb  within  which  it  has 
grown,"  began  Mr.  Crandall  as  soon  as  the  laughter  had  died 
away.  "How  do  you  make  out  that  conscience  can  change  its 
allegiance  from  the  rules  within  which  it  has  grown — or  rather 
— if  I  understand  correctly,  the  teachers  of  natural  ethics — 
around  which  it  has  crystalized.''" 

"But  Barbara  when  are  you  going  to  make  Mr.  Barlow 
take  note  of  Mr.  Balfour's  gloomy  picture  of  dissolution.'"' 
asked  Mrs.  Lurton  scenting  another  long  digression. 

"Postpone  your  gloom  for  awhile,  dear  Mrs.  Lurton,"  an- 
swered Barbara,  laughing.  "All  in  due  time.  But  it  has  been 
a  good  deal  more  important  to  know  about  conscience  and  a 


PAULINE    PARSONS  41 

possible  temporary  insanity  that  may  seize  us  any  minute,  now, 
than  about  dissolution  which  can  scarcely  be  recognized  as 
within  the  field  of  practical  politics." 

There  was  a  generous  burst  of  laughter  at  this  sally  in 
which  all  even  Mrs.  Lurton  joined — all  except  Pauline. 

"It  isn't  fair  to  make  light  of  his  explanations,"  said  the 
latter  to  herself  indignantly.  "There  is  not  another  man  here 
who  could  answer  all  those  questions  so  clearly." 

But  apparently  Mr.  Barlow  did  not  take  Miss  Fleming's 
sally  as  aimed  at  him  for  he  laughed  as  heartily  as  the  others 
and  at  her  request  took  up  the  discussion  again  as  seriously 
as  ever — a  discussion  which  seemed,  too,  to  hold  the  interest  of 
the  company. 

"I  think  it  is  more  accurate  to  say  that  conscience  has 
grown  up  within  the  rules  of  conduct  than  that  it  has  crystal- 
ized  around  any  particular  rules,  Mr.  Crandall,"  he  resumed. 
"That  is,  conscience  is  the  feeling  of  obligation  under  which 
we  live  to  conform  to  those  utilitarian  rules  of  thumb  to  which, 
we  have  been  taught  in  childhood,  our  fellow-men,  the  law  and 
the  church  expect  us  to  conform — supplemented  by  such  modi- 
fications of  our  childhood's  teaching  as  our  own  mature  ex- 
perience of  utility  leads  us  to  adopt.  It  has  grown  up  through 
ages  of  conformity  to  the  teachings  of  childhood.  It  does  not 
everywhere  and  at  all  times  command  obedience  to  one  code  par 
excellence  but  commands  obedience  to  the  code  of  the  place  and 
the  day — whatever  it  is — vaguely  recognized  as  having  a  utili- 
tarian sanction  in  the  main  and  subject  more  or  less  to  amend- 
ment in  accordance  with  our  personal  experience.  The  less 
clearly  a  man  recognizes  the  basis  of  utility  in  the  code  the 
more  binding  it  is  upon  him,  and  the  less  likely  he  is  to  feel 
the  binding  force  of  amendments  suggested  by  the  utilitarian 
evidence  of  the  day — that  is,  he  is  likely  to  think  of  the  code 
as  something  revealed  complete  in  the  beginning  or  intuitive 
and  forever  unchangeable.  On  the  other  hand  the  more  clearly 
he  recognizes  the  utilitarian  inspiration  of  the  code  the  more 
likely  he  is  to  substitute  amendments  of  his  own  intelligent 
adoption — though  not  necessarily  of  his  own  discovery.  It 
seems  to  me  that  men  generally  are  coming  to  recognize  that 
utilitarian  considerations,  however  falsely  weighed,  have  always 
been  at  the  bottom  of  our  old  rules  of  thumb.  More  and  more, 
too,  we  are  coming  to  see  that  utilitarian  service  to  men,  as 
distinguished  from  institutions  and  personifications,  and  to  men 


42  PAULINE    PARSONS 

generally,  as  distinguished  from  those  classes  whose  selfish  in- 
terests largely  molded  the  old  rules  of  thumb  must  be  the 
inspiration  of  the  new  rules  of  reason.  So,  I  think,  we  are 
going  to  see  very  great  changes  in  the  code.  These  changes 
will  go  hand  in  hand  with  our  more  intelligent  hold  upon  esti- 
mates of  justice  and  with  our  wider  and  keener  sympathies. 
Conscience  as  ever  will  command  substantial  obedience  to  the 
code  of  the  day  and  all  the  more  effectively  and  exclusively  if 
the  utilities  of  the  new  code  appeal  to  men's  estimates  of  justice 
and  their  sympathies.  When  the  code  was  eye  for  eye  and 
tooth  for  tooth,  conscience  commanded  obedience,  but  the 
sympathies  of  the  moral  pioneers  of  that  day  must  have  re- 
belled. When  the  code  becomes  a  command  of  mercy  and  help, 
conscience  again  will  say  obey  and  it  will  be  backed  by  sym- 
pathy and  a  more  understanding  sense  of  justice — duty  becom- 
ing ever  more  and  more  a  pleasure  and  the  growth  of  character 
gradually  making  conscience  unnecessary  and  obsolete." 

"Ah,  but  you  forget  Leslie  Stephens'  admission  that  while 
progress  solves  old  problems  and  discords  and  extirpates  old 
evils  there  are  always  coming  up  new  problems  and  new  dis- 
cords and  new  evils,"  protested  Professor  Hardy. 

"New  problems — ^yes.  But  problems  do  not  become  dis- 
cords and  evils  if  they  are  promptly  and  justly  solved.  We 
have  the  problems  now  but  without  the  character  to  want  to 
solve  them  honestly  and  justly  and  sympathetically  or  to  take 
pleasure  in  the  results  if  they  cross  our  grosser  passions.  But 
as  the  animal  heritage  is  outgrown  the  problems  will  seem  sim- 
pler and  the  solutions  will  appeal  to  pleasure  of  a  higher  kind." 

"But  suppose  a  new  set  of  rules  not  based  upon  utility  at 
all — say  based  upon  the  ideal  of  self-realization  as  part  of  the 
Social  Whole.  Then  conscience  would  ally  itself  with  those 
rules,"  suggested  Mr.  Ransom. 

"To  a  degree  and  for  a  time — according  to  how  many  of 
us  have  permanently  graduated  from  the  tutelage  of  authorities 
and  outgrown  the  worship  of  phrases,"  answered  Mr.  Barlow. 
"No  doubt — supposing  the  moral  insanity  to  give  the  new 
code  a  good  start — there  would  be  many  people  whose  con- 
sciences would  conform  to  the  blind  Ought  of  their  childhood's 
lessons  little  qualified  by  enlightened  estimates  of  utility.  But 
it  would  take  little  leaven  to  leaven  the  whole  lump.  Specula- 
tion would  at  once  begin  anew  as  to  why  conduct  should  be 
called    good    simply   because   some    authority   vouchsafed    its 


PAULINE    PARSONS  43 

making  for  the  Common  Good  of  the  Social  Whole,  if,  in  fact, 
it  did  not  appear  to  benefit  individuals  generally  and  equitably, 
but  only  benefited  certain  favored  individuals  or  certain  chosen 
institutions." 

"But  you  just  assume  that  it  would  not  benefit  individuals 
generally — according  to  place  in  the  Social  Whole,"  said  Mr. 
Ransom. 

"According  to  place  in  an  invented  or  assumed  Social 
Whole — or  a  Social  Whole  of  the  Medes  and  Persians — is  not 
equity,"  replied  Mr.  Barlow.  "If,  however,  it  turned  out  that 
in  effect  the  self-realization  code  did  make  for  the  benefit  of 
individuals  generally  and  equitably  then  men  would  soon  cast 
away  the  shell  and  hold  on  to  the  kernel." 

"But  would  the  two  codes  be  any  different?  Would  not 
the  concrete  rules  of  conduct  be  the  same  under  either  code? 
If  so,  why  quibble  about  descriptive  phrases?"  asked  Professor 
Mann. 

"The  code  of  men  individually  responsible  to  themselves  and 
to  each  other,  growing  through  responsibility  more  intelligent 
and  sympathetic  and  to  have  more  in  mind  the  welfare  of  in- 
dividuals one  and  all  on  this  earth  and  that  only  must  even- 
tually differ  from  that  imposed  upon  us  by  men — however  good 
and  great — to  whom  we  delegate  the  right  or  duty  of  arbi- 
trarily expounding  the  Common  Good  of  the  Social  Whole," 
answered  Mr.  Barlow.  "One  assesses  individual  burdens  and 
benefits  only,  the  other  if  it  assesses  individual  burdens  and 
benefits  at  all  does  so  in  relation  to  an  arbitrary  factor  which 
vitiates  all  results." 

"See  here.  Barlow,"  broke  in  Commodore  Lurton,  who  had 
as  yet  taken  no  part  in  the  discussion.  "You  believe,  for  the 
reasons  you  give,  which  I  consider  sound,  that  the  Common 
Good  notion  even  if  enthroned  in  ethical  and  political  thought 
would  have  but  a  short  reign." 

**Yes." 

"As  I  understand  it,"  added  Barbara,  "conscience  com- 
mands obedience  to  the  code  of  the  day,  subject  to  private 
amendment.  The  more  the  code  ignores  utilities  for  individuals 
the  stronger  would  be  the  pull  of  private  amendment  back  to 
an  utilitarian  individualistic  code;  because,  regardless  of  the- 
ories and  phrases — the  shells — only  such  a  kernel  would  per- 
manently satisfy  our  growing  intelligence  and  sympathies." 

It  seemed  to  Pauline  that  Barbara  had  summed  up  her 


44  PAULINE    PARSONS 

secretary's  exposition  very  cleverly  and  this  irritated  her  even 
more  than  had,  a  few  minutes  before,  Miss  Fleming's  apparent 
lack  of  serious  consideration  of  his  views. 

"Good !  Very  well  expressed,"  said  the  Commodore.  "You 
well  preface  the  question  I  want  to  ask.  It  is  whether  we  as 
practical  men  and  women  have  not  been  giving  too  much  time 
tonight  to  the  discussion  of  the  possibility  of  fundamental  error 
creeping  in — error  to  which  I  feel  sure  the  ordinary  voter  is 
giving  no  ear — and  which  if  it  did  creep  in  would  as  you  show 
work  its  own  cure.  And  as  to  the  pragmatic  method  too,  I 
feel  that  it  would  work  its  own  cure — from  sheer  inability  of 
men  to  get  together  on  any  common  ground  for  discussion  of 
our  affairs." 

"Oh!  I  think  these  questions  are  very  interesting — and 
proper  to  discuss  at  length.  Commodore,"  exclaimed  Barbara. 
"If  not,  it  is  my  fault,  not  Mr.  Barlow's,  for  it  is  I  who  have 
brought  out  his  interesting  views  in  such  detail." 

"Interesting  and  proper  enough — academically,"  said  Mr. 
Lurton.  "But  are  they  of  practical  import?  I  ask  Mr. 
Barlow  what  practical  advantage  there  is  in  digging  into  fund- 
amentals— and  I  am  not  a  pragmatist  either." 

"Although  fundamentally  crooked  thinking  will  eventually 
cure  itself.  Commodore,"  replied  Mr.  Barlow,  "it  may  in  the 
meantime  do  a  great  deal  of  harm.  When  you  find  a  professor 
of  philosophy  breaking  into  politics  with  a  pragmatic  attack 
upon  the  teachings  of  political  economy*  it  seems  to  me  of 
very  practical  concern.  It  shows  the  danger  of  letting  down 
the  bars  of  scholarly  restraint  upon  those  whose  position  seems 
to  qualify  them  as  expert  witnesses.  It  shows  how  pragmatism 
may  lend  a  jaunty  air  of  respectability  to  every  intellectual 
flunky  who  has  his  master's  axe  to  grind.     Then — " 

"Good!"  cried  Bob. 

"Hear!     Hear!"  from  Charles. 

"Then,  as  to  the  self-realization  method,"  continued  Mr. 
Barlow.  "It  is  studied  seriously  in  our  universities  as  a  possi- 
ble method.  It  seems  to  me  that  I  have  shown  that  it  is 
meaningless  or  false.  But  its  viciousness  consists  in  its  de- 
generating tendency.  It  tends  to  fit  men  for  regimentation  to 
make  them  contented  and  ambitionless.  Then  there  are  the 
terms  'Common  Good'  and  'Social  Whole.'     They  sound  well. 

*W.  Caldwell  in  the  Nineteenth  Century,  Nov.,  1912. 


PAULINE    PARSONS  46 

In  the  mouths  of  those  whose  interests  lie  in  exploitation  they 
are  powerful  pieces  of  clap-trap.  I  have  not  sought  to  press 
my  views  upon  the  company,  Commodore,  but  have  been  as  it 
were  personally  conducted  by  our  very  capable  moderator." 
Mr.  Barlow  bowed  gravely  to  Miss  Fleming.  Pauline's 
fingers  clutched  her  fan  again. 

"Such  being  the  case,"  he  added,  "I  make  no  apologies  for 
expressing  them  frankly." 

"And  ably,"  added  the  Commodore.  "And  there  does  seem 
to  be  a  practical  side  to  the  matters.  I  should  certainly  feel 
concerned  to  see  our  people  turned  into  a  docile  flock  of  sheep." 
"Yet  I  am  surprised  to  find  you  showing  so  little  faith  in 
the  sagacity  of  the  voters,  Barlow,"  said  Crandall  sarcastically, 
"those  individuals  who  are  getting  on  so  famously  in  sympathy 
and  intelligence." 

"When  you  have  a  just  cause  before  a  jury,  Crandall,  is 
it  your  habit  to  let  the  jury  dissect  the  testimony  of  the  ad- 
verse experts  unaided,  or  do  you  help  them  by  cross-examina- 
tion and  by  putting  on  your  own  experts.'*" 

"There's  one  for  you,  Crandall,"  laughed  Bob. 
"And  you  must  remember,  too,  Crandall,  that  the  electorate 
is  a  jury  that  has  not  only  to  weigh  the  evidence  but  to  pass 
on    the    qualification    of    the    experts.     It    has    no    judge    to 
assist  it." 

"I  imagine  the  electorate  will  need  all  the  assistance  you  can 
give  it,  Mr.  Barlow,"  said  Professor  Mann,  sarcastically,  "and 
then  some." 

"I  see  no  more  reason  for  pessimism  than  for  cavalier 
optimism.  Professor  Mann,"  said  Mr.  Barlow.  "You  must 
remember  that  the  jury  at  any  particular  juncture  is  limited. 
It  is  only  a  small  number  of  the  voters  whose  verdict  counts 
all  the  time — ^those  who  are  unselfishly  and  intelligently  ar- 
rayed against  every  special  interest.  They  and  the  voters  in 
the  border  land  of  light  constitute  the  jury.  The  selfish  in- 
terests check  each  other  more  or  less ;  the  labor  union  against 
the  capital  union;  the  Roman  hierarchy  against  the  socialist 
and  the  fake-individualist  against  both;  the  liquor  interests 
against  the  would-be  regulators  of  private  morals ;  the  would- 
be  regulators  against  all  forms  of  commercialized  vice;  the 
civil  service  reform  beaurocrat  against  the  spoilsman;  the 
spoilsman  against  the  beaurocrat.  The  voters  interested  in 
any  little  selfishness  are  few  compared  to  the  great  numbers 


46  PAULINE    PARSONS 

selfish  enough  in  their  own  way  but  opposed  to  that  particular 
selfishness.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  immediate  hope  of  progress 
lies  in  the  fact  that  most  of  us  will  be  willing  to  give  up  our 
privileges  and  arrogances  in  order  that  we  may  preserve  our 
rights." 

"And  the  more  remote  hope.'*"  queried  Mr.  Walthall. 

"In  the  improvement  of  our  pleasures.  In  other  words  in 
character  growth." 

"Exactly — the  adjustment  of  feeling  to  environment  grow- 
ing more  complex." 

"You  are  a  disciple  of  Professor  Westermarck .''"  inquired 
Professor  Hardy.  "You  believe  that  morals  are  wholly  a  mat- 
ter of  feeling." 

"Not  exactly.  Of  course  knowledge  alone  never  caused  a 
man  to  lift  his  little  finger — it  fructifies  in  conduct  only  by 
guiding  desire.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact  knowledge  does  guide 
desire.  Therefore  it  seems  to  me  that  Professor  Westermarck 
is  in  error  in  affirming  that  there  is  no  science  of  what  ought 
to  be.  Man,  having  discovered  that  he  is  evolving  morally, 
cannot  help  inquiring  what  kinds  of  conduct  will  realize  his 
desires  and  what  kinds  of  conduct  will  retard  them.  The 
principles  underlying  the  answers  to  those  inquiries  will 
constitute  the  science  of  what  he  ought  to  do.  Herbert 
Spencer — " 

"Realize  his  desires !  Merciful  heavens  !  Morals  !"  gasped 
Mr.  Puff.     "I  call  it  the  breaking  away  from  all  morals." 

"True  it  is  a  breaking  away  from  the  morals  of  selfish 
authority  and  to  some  extent  from  utilitarian  rules  of  thumb — 
but  it  is  the  adoption  of  the  morals  of  knowledge.  I  have 
already  named  the  goal  we  must,  under  the  compulsion  of  our 
very  nature,  desire  to  reach — the  greatest  happiness  for  all 
— with  which  will  come  the  smothering  of  the  sense  of  duty  in 
pleasure.  More  than  forty  years  ago  Herbert  Spencer,  in  his 
famous  letter  to  John  Stuart  Mill  wrote  that  it  is  the  business 
of  moral  science  to  deduce  from  the  laws  of  life  and  the  condi- 
tions of  existence  what  kinds  of  action  necessarily  tend  to  pro- 
duce happiness  and  what  kinds  to  produce  unhappiness  and 
that  these  deductions  are  to  be  regarded  as  rules  of  conduct 
and  are  then  to  be  conformed  to,  irrespective  of  a  direct  esti- 
mation of  happiness  or  misery.  There,  it  seems  to  me,  is  the 
high-water  mark  of  ethical  thought.  If,  under  the  impulse  of 
more  or  less  ignorant  groping  for  happiness  hampered  by  the 


PAULINE    PARSONS  47 

ethical  proclamations  of  authority,  we  have  come  this  far 
towards  the  goal,  how  much  swifter  will  be  our  pace  when  we 
consciously  bring  the  understanding  to  the  a"id  of  feeling? 
Not  only  will  our  ought  be  an  ought  of  understanding  but 
under  the  more  certain  enjoyment  of  the  higher  satisfactions 
which  knowledge  will  insure  character  will  grow  very  much 
more  rapidly  than  in  the  past.  That  is,  though  we  shall  have 
a  science  of  the  ought  the  rules  will  be  a  mere  stop-gap  pending 
character  growth." 


VI 

"Yet  one  of  the  great  masters  of  your  school,  Mr.  Barlow," 
said  Mr.  Ransom,  "came  at  last  to  cry  out  that  the  human 
soul  has  asked  for  Theology  not  for  Dynamics." 

"Then  let  human  souls  do  as  that  of  John  Fiske  did — give 
to  our  knowledge  of  appearances  any  transcendental  interpre- 
tations they  crave  and  believe,"  replied  Mr.  Barlow.  "Behind 
the  veil  science  cannot  intrude  and  meliorism  is  the  sole  cri- 
terion. But  let  not  the  soul  then  deduce  Moral  Dynamics 
from  such  interpretations — still  less.  Moral  Statics." 

"But,  Barlow,  you  do  not  put  the  Absolute  to  one  side  by 
disposing  of  the  ghostlike  Absolute  of  the  neo-Hegelians,"  ex- 
claimed Professor  Hardy.  "The  Absolute  is  not  a  ghostlike 
existence  but  is  an  eternal  rule  that  is  to  bind  every  will  in 
its  aim  to  attain  the  real  world.  The  Absolute  is  not  an  exis- 
tence but  is  'valid,'  'it  is  not  a  thing  but  an  obligation  which 
prescribes  beforehand  the  standards  and  the  ideals  of  every 
individual  endeavor.'  It  is  the  function  of  philosophical,  criti- 
cal idealism,  which  began  with  Kant  and  which  by  proclaiming 
the  'absolute  character  of  the  ideals  of  the  will'  oflFers  the  real 
bulwark  against  materialistic  positivism,  'to  deduce  from  the 
character  of  the  world-positing  will  the  particular  demands 
which  are  binding  for  every  possible  search  of  truth,  beauty, 
morality  and  religion.'  It  is  true  that  the  only  world  that  we 
can  know  is  the  world  of  our  experience  but  this  world  is  de- 
termined by  the  thought  forms  of  our  understanding,  and  as  to 
ideal  values  man's,  intuitions  must  ever  bind  his  acquired 
knowledge.     Your  views  about  the  changing  allegiance  of  the 


48  PAULINE    PARSONS 

conscience  are  only  too  impressive  evidence  of  the  danger  in 
materialistic  positivism." 

"Danger  to  what,  Mr.  Hardy,"  asked  Miss  Fleming. 
Lovering  laughed  and  gave  Barbara  an  appreciative  glance. 
But  Professor  Hardy  merely  shrugged  his  shoulders. 

"Permit  me  once  more  to  say,"  said  Barlow,  "that  I  have 
not  tried  to  dispose  of  the  ghostlike  Absolute  nor  do  I  wish  to 
dispose  of  your  Absolute  rule.  Of  course  our  experience  is 
'determined  by  the  thought  forms  of  our  understanding'  and 
of  course  there  are  obligations  *which  prescribe  beforehand  the 
standards  and  the  ideals  for  every  individual  endeavor.'  These 
are  just  other  ways  of  saying  that  man's  intelligence  and  feel- 
ing and  conduct  are  within  the  jurisdiction  of  natural  law. 
There  is  no  room  for  difference  between  us  here  nor  for  differ- 
ence with  Mr.  Ransom — to  whom  this  all  means  the  unfolding 
of  the  Absolute.  Your  friends,  Mr.  Ransom's  friends  and  my 
friends  all  stand  together  here.  Our  common  enemy  is  the 
capricionist.  But  when  we  come  to  the  method  by  which  we 
make  these  thought  forms  of  our  understanding,  the  obligatory 
ideals,  the  natural  laws  in  short,  of  use  to  us  in  this  life, 
there  we  differ.  Your  friends  and  Mr.  Ransom's  friends  wish 
to  proclaim  what  my  friends  wish  to  discover.  But  as  long 
as  you  proclaim  just  what  we  discover  there  need  be  no  quarrel 
between  us.  It  is  only  when  you  invent  the  world-positing  will 
or  the  Moral  Reason,  or  give  to  the  conscience  a  character  it 
has  not  in  order  that  by  divorcing  us  from  the  ordinary  under- 
standing and  its  powers  of  generalization  you  may  have  a 
plausible  sanction  under  the  guise  of  laying  the  spectre  of 
materialism  to  make  proclamations  in  support  of  the  very 
flesh  and  blood  of  materialism — ^it  is  only  there  that  we  join 
issue.  But  the  outcome  will  not  be  uncertain.  The  real  fac- 
ulty, the  understanding  is  bound  to  win  against  imaginary 
faculties,  the  Moral  Reason  and  world-positing  will — and  all 
other  imaginary  agents  of  an  objective  Law-giver." 

"Ah !  The  flesh  and  blood  of  materialism !"  repeated  Lover- 
ing impressively.  *'There  you  have  the  right  name  for  calling 
upon  the  name  of  God  to  vouch  for  the  judge-made  right  to 
revel  in  luxury  while  others  starve." 

"At  any  rate,  Mr.  Barlow  is  sound  in  rejecting  the  objec- 
tive source  of  the  moral  law,"  said  Professor  Mann  to  Pauline. 

"But  he  does  not  reject  it.  Professor  Mann,"  protested 
Pauline,  her  eyes  bright  with  enthusiasm.     The  clean-cut  dis- 


PAULINE    PARSONS  49 

tinctions  of  her  secretary  appealed  to  her  logical  mind;  and 
his  ability  in  debate  gave  her  new  pleasure  in  her  sense  of 
proprietorship.  "He  rejects  the  imaginary  agents  of  the  Law- 
giver, not  the  Law-giver.  Mr.  Barlow  is  as  he  has  said,  a 
thoroughgoing  agnostic.  It  is  idle  to  argue  about  the  Law- 
giver.    It  is  for  the  individual  soul  to  believe." 

"But  are  we  not  conscious  of  the  fact  that  we  have  binding 
moral  intuitions.?"  asked  Miss  Elsingham,  addressing  Barlow. 

"We  are  conscious  of  moral  feeling  to  which  the  name 
intuition  was  given  long  before  its  nature  was  understood  or 
it  was  supposed  to  have  a  history.  If  by  continuing  to  regard 
it  as  an  intuition  you  mean  to  assert  that  it  existed  full  grown 
in  the  earliest  forms  of  life,  or  even  in  the  breasts  of  the  first 
men,  and  will  be  no  more  highly  developed  in  the  breasts  of 
men  of  the  future,  then  it  is  obvious  that  there  are  no  intuitions 
of  that  sort.  If  you  mean  by  intuition  eternal  rules  hovering, 
as  it  were,  in  the  objective  absolute  waiting  to  be  experienced 
and  generalized  by  the  understanding  and  the  feelings,  or,  in 
the  phraseology  of  Professor  Hardy's  school,  posited  by  the 
will  of  the  individual  as  he  develops  intellectually  and  emo- 
tionally, then  you  speak  of  something  that  either  has  the  same 
message  for  the  individual  as  his  feelings  and  ordinary  under- 
standing have  for  him,  or  else  its  messages  have  no  other  or 
better  warrant  than  the  unsupported  authority  of  the  volunteer 
interpreter  of  the  intuitions.  Nor  will  the  knowledge  of  right 
and  wrong  ever  become  intuitive.  In  the  domain  of  morals 
it  is  only  the  feelings  that  become  spontaneous ;  and  long  be- 
fore knowledge  however  certain — that  a  particular  kind  of  con- 
duct is  wrong — can  become  intuitive  the  characteristic  feeling 
will  have  forestalled  it.  That  is,  character  growth  will  have 
made  knowledge  of  secondary  importance  only — for  purposes 
of  discussion  and  instructing,  admonishing  and  restraining  the 
young  and  morally  defective." 

"Yet  just  now  learned  opinion  seems  to  be  swinging  back 
to  the  rationalist  view,"  suggested  Professor  Walthall. 

"That  now,  a  half  a  century  after  Spencer's  Psychology 
and  thirty  years  after  the  Data  of  Ethics,  there  should  be 
serious  preaching  of  intuitions  as  a  means  of  divorcing  men 
from  the  generalizing  faculty  only  shows  how  hard  put  to  it  are 
the  opponents  of  the  progress  that  must  follow  in  the  wake 
of  positive  agnostic  idealism.  They  point  the  finger  of  denun- 
ciation at  a  spectre  of  materialism  and  so  distract  attention 


60  PAULINE    PARSONS 

from  the  real  materialism  of  unjust  rules  in  support  of  prop- 
erty and  place," 

"Is  it  fair  to  impugn  motives,  Mr.  Barlow?"  asked  Mr. 
Ransom. 

"I  do  not  impugn  motives,  Mr.  Ransom,"  replied  Mr. 
Barlow,  directing  a  level  glance  at  the  learned  gentleman. 
"The  corrupt  man  is  not  the  worst  obstacle  to  democracy  and 
progress." 

"But  you  speak  as  if  the  fact  that  intuitions  have  differed 
in  the  past  and  differ  now  is  an  argument  against  their  vali4- 
ity,"  said  Professor  Hardy.  "Are  you  warranted  in  so  doing? 
Because  some  savages  can  count  only  five  does  that  fact  des- 
troy the  validity  of  the  multiplication  table?  May  we  not 
take  the  intuitions  of  the  developed  man  as  the  standard?" 

"If  you  can  find  the  developed  man,  I  will  not  quarrel  as  to 
whether  his  pronouncements  are  derived  a  priori  or  a  pos- 
teriori," replied  Mr.  Barlow,  dryly. 

When  the  laughter  that  rippled  round  the  table  had  sub- 
sided, he  continued: 

"The  fact  that  the  savage  can  count  only  to  five  and  has 
never  heard  of  the  multiplication  table  is  no  argument  against 
its  validity  because  the  truth  of  the  multiplication  table  may 
be  demonstrated — with  as  great  certainty  as  we  can  demon- 
strate anything — by  generalization.  The  coexistences  under- 
lying the  table  have  been  found  to  be  valid  in  an  almost  infinite 
number  of  cases  and  have  never  once  been  found  invalid.  Since 
the  coexistences  of  the  multiplication  table  have  been  estab- 
lished by  an  almost  infinitely  long  enumerationem  simpUcem, 
amply  verified,  it  would  be  strange  if  they  had  the  same  status 
in  the  thought  of  the  descendants  of  men  that  had  never  gen- 
eralized about  these  coexistences  as  in  the  thought  of  the  de- 
scendants of  ancestors  who  had.  The  difference  in  the  attitude 
towards  the  multiplication  table  is  just  what  you  would  expect 
towards  a  product  of  generalization.  But  such  difference  is 
fatal  to  an  allegation  of  coexistence  which  is  not  the  product 
of  generalization.  For  if  it  is  not  the  product  of  generalization 
and  not  universally  accepted  what  is  the  basis  of  its  claim  upon 
our  acceptance?  The  very  fact  that  constant  appeals  have 
to  be  made  to  the  feelings  and  the  'ordinary  understanding'  in 
behalf  of  the  'notion'  of  duty,  is  in  itself  proof  that  there  is 
no  such  'notion.'  " 

"Now,  Mr.  Barlow,  won't  j'^ou  please  give  an  illustration  of 


PAULINE    PARSONS  51 

some  change  of  rules  and  the  transference  of  the  allegiance  of 
conscience  of  which  you  speak?"  requested  Miss  Elsingham. 

Mr.  Barlow  knit  his  brows. 

"I  had  in  mind,  while  I  was  speaking,  one  that  will  no 
doubt  arouse  a  good  deal  of  criticism  and  open  up  an  entirely 
new  field  of  discussion,"  he  said. 

"Fire  away,  Barlow,"  said  the  Commodore.  "We  may  not 
all  agree  with  you  but  we  all  are  robust  enough  to  stand  any 
ordinary  shock." 

"My  illustration  will  not  call  for  intellectual  or  moral 
robustness,"  replied  Mr.  Barlow,  laughing,  "but  for  a  certain 
amount  of  sportsmanlike  disregard  for  pocketbook  protests." 

"Go  ahead.  Barlow.  We  will  try  to  nerve  ourselves  against 
even  that  shock — far  more  grievous  to  most  of  us  than  any 
fears  of  the  materialistic  bogie." 

"Well,  then,  for  instance,"  began  the  secretary,  "it  seems 
to  me  that  with  better,  clearer,  knowledge  of  ideal  utilities  we 
are  quite  likely  to  adopt  a  modified  set  of  rules  about  the  rela- 
tion of  the  public  to  private  property.  If  we  do  it  will  be 
but  a  very  short  time  before  these  new  rules  will  become  as 
binding  upon  conscience  as  the  old  rules.  As  to  one  form  of 
private  property  we  can  almost  see  men's  consciences  change 
their  allegiance.  I  mean  that  form  known  as  good  will.  There 
was  a  time  not  long  ago  when  no  one  questioned  a  man's  prop- 
erty right  in  the  so-called  good  will  of  his  business  and  his 
right  to  sell  it.  Had  any  one  proposed  to  prohibit  his  selling 
it  most  likely  a  successful  appeal  could  have  been  made  to 
men's  consciences  not  to  lend  themselves  to  such  an  unjust 
interference  with  his  property  rights.  Now,  however,  after  so 
much  good  will  has  been  disposed  of  to  the  investing  public 
in  the  form  of  so-called  watered  stock,  and  when  from  time  to 
time  legislation  is  sought  by  wage-earners  and  consumers  not 
interested  in  the  investment,  which  legislation  would  have  a 
tendency  to  confiscate  or  rather  destroy  this  good  will — by 
destroying  the  earnings  which  furnish  the  dividends  upon  the 
stock  issued  against  it — conscientious  men  are  no  longer  gen- 
erally agreed  as  to  the  property  rights  in  it.  A  great  many 
men  now  feel  bound  by  conscience  not  to  lend  themselves  to  the 
perpetuation  of  burdens  upon  wage-earners  and  consumers  in 
order  that  the  so-called  good  will  may  be  made  secure." 

"But  these  investors  paid  their  good  money  for  this  good 
will,"  exclaimed  Mr.  Condor,  a  new  participant  in  the  debate. 


52  PAULINE    PARSONS 

"I  can't  see  where  there  is  a  chance  for  conscience  to  be  in 
doubt." 

Mr.  Condor  had  taken  no  interest  in  the  discussion  of  fund- 
amentals but  dividends  were  things  about  which  he  had  settled 
convictions. 

"True,"  assented  Mr.  Barlow.  "It  is  a  pity  that  we  ever 
allowed  the  sale  of  these  enormous  blocks  of  property — largely 
ephemeral.  We  would  not  now,  or  soon,  have  to  decide  upon 
which  of  two  innocent — though  not  equally  innocent — classes 
we  shall  allow  the  loss  to  fall — loss  which  on  the  other  side  of 
the  ledger  shows  up  in  profit  to  the  sellers  of  the  good  will 
and  to  the  promoters  of  the  sales." 

"Do  you  mean  to  insinuate,  sir,  that  frauds  have  been  per- 
petuated in  selling  this  good  will  to  the  public.''"  asked  Mr. 
Condor,  with  some  indignation.  "I  am  speaking,  of  course,  of 
such  sound  dividend  paying  securities — or  with  reasonable 
prospects  of  dividends — as  houses  say  like — er — Bemis  &  Co. — 
have  been  distributing  to  the  investing  public.  I  don't  mean 
issues  with  nothing  behind  them — clearly  fraudulent." 

"But  what  do  you  mean,  Mr.  Barlow,  by  the  expression 
*not  equally  innocent'.'*"  asked  Miss  Elsingham.  "Of  course 
the  buyers  of  these  securities  are  perfectly  innocent." 

"Pardon  me,  Miss  Elsingham,  if  I  answer  Mr.  Condor 
first,"  said  Mr.  Barlow.  "^My  answer  to  his  question  will,  I 
think,  lead  to  the  answer  to  yours.  The  issues  I  refer  to,  Mr. 
Condor,  are  just  such  issues  as  Bemis  &  Co.,  and  other  equally 
reputable  houses  have  been  floating.  It  seems  to  me  that  Mr. 
Bemis  and  his  kind  are  of  the  most  baneful  influences  of  our 
times,  but  I  would  not  go  so  far  as  to  use  the  term  frauds  in 
connection  with  their  operations.  In  fact,  I  go  so  far  as  to 
say  that  there  has  been  no  fraud.  They  have  been  operating 
with  perfect  conscientiousness — so  far  as  I  know — probably 
the  conscientiousness  of  ignorance.  They  have  even  been  under 
the  impression,  I  believe,  that  they  have  been  doing  a  great 
public  service  while  at  the  same  time  making  very  large  profits 
for  themselves.  They  have  thought  that  they  had  bricks  of 
real  gold  to  sell  to  the  public.  It  is  a  fact,  however,  that  they 
have  sold  the  public  the  gold-bricks  of  the  vernacular.  This 
so-called  good  will  which  they  have  sold  to  the  investing  public 
has  consisted,  I  think,  of  these  elements: — first  real  good  will, 
the  personal  hold  the  original  owners  had  upon  the  confidence 
of   their   customers ;    second,   in   almost   all   cases,   privileges, 


PAULINE    PARSONS  53 

such  as  the  privilege  of  monopoly  in  operating  a  public  utility 
or  the  privilege  of  exploiting  bound  consumers  handed  over  to 
them  by  tariff  legislation ;  third,  in  the  case  of  a  combination 
of  several  competing  businesses  the  capital  value  of  expected 
increased  profits  due  to  higher  prices  consequent  upon  the 
elimination  of  competition  or  to  the  saving  of  the  wages  of 
discharged  supernumeraries,  or  both;  and  fourth,  in  all  cases, 
the  capital  value  of  the  difference  between  what  the  wage- 
earners  produce — measured  by  their  capability  to  produce  in 
a  favorable  location  under  good  management,  adequately  paid 
— admittedly  somewhat  indefinite — and  what  they  get  in  wages. 
None  of  these  four  elements  have  permanent  value — but  no 
doubt  most  of  the  buyers  of  these  securities  issued  against  them 
have  thought  they  were  buying  permanent  value.  You  see 
then.  Miss  Elsingham,  tha;t  the  innocence  of  the  purchasers 
rests  mainly  on  the  plea  of  ignorance  and  cannot  be  compared 
in  faultlessness  with  that,  for  instance,  of  the  wage-earners  who 
have  been  mainly  the  victims  of  circumstances — to  the  con- 
tinuance of  which  they  are  in  no  way  bound  to  agree.  And 
it  seems  to  me  it  will  appear  to  be  the  duty — if  indeed  not  the 
pleasure — of  many  disinterested  citizens  to  help  them  to  read- 
just conditions." 

"Rather  radical  opinions,  Mrs.  Orton,  to  be  held  by  the 
secretary  of  one  whose  interests  are  so  far-reaching  as  your 
niece's,"  suggested  Mr.  Crandall  to  Pauline's  aunt. 

"Secretary?  Pauline's.''  Mr.  Barlow.'"'  demanded  Mrs. 
Orton  in  staccato — but  in  a  low  tone. 

"Yes.     Did  you  not  know.?" 

"No.  I  had  not  heard — and  his  manner — it  has  been  that 
of  one  who  had  the  power  behind  the  opinions."  Mrs.  Orton 
looked  with  renewed  interest  at  her  niece's  secretary.  "I  have 
supposed  that  he  was   some   well-to-do  philanthropist." 

"I  imagine  he  has  counted  upon  the  power  of  your  niece's 
fortune,"  said  Mr.  Crandall,  dryly.  "But,  if  I  am  any  judge 
of  faces.  Miss  Parsons  will  have  a  mind  and  a  will  of  her  own 
as  to  that." 

"I  have  noticed  that  Pauline  seems  displeased,"  said  Mrs. 
Orton.  "No  wonder!  The  assurance  of  the  man!  It  is  as- 
tounding !" 


64  PAUI.INE    PARSONS 


VII 

"But  you  speak  of  the  value  of  the  wage-earner's  product 
under  good  management  favorably  located  and  adequately  paid, 
as  being  admittedly  indefinite,"  suggested  Bob.  "Does  not 
that  allow  room  for  the  permanency  of  a  considerable  part  of 
the  fourth  item?" 

"Yes — varying  according  to  the  ability  of  the  dominant 
managing  element  of  the  corporation,  its  capital  connections 
and  the  favorableness  of  its  location,  and  so  forth.  I  did  not 
mean  to  intimate  that  the  fourth  item  would  in  all  cases  be 
eliminated  though  in  some  cases  it  will  be  eliminated  and  in 
all  cases  reduced.  That  is,  unless  we  permit  combinations  in 
the  control  of  capital  which  may  prevent  it  flowing  freely  to 
entrepreneurs  of  ability  who  are  eager  to  compete  for  labor, 
though  on  an  advancing  wage  scale.  I  should  add,  also,  that 
of  course  another  great  wave  of  improvement  in  the  arts  would 
tend  to  take  care  of  advances  in  wages  and  so  for  a  time 
check  the  shrinkage  in  profits.  And  of  course,  too,  I  except 
the  disturbing  factor  of  changes  in  the  gold  production." 

"Why,  man,  your  fourth  item  is  just  the  reward  of  brains," 
exclaimed  Mr.  Condor. 

"Unquestionably — ^brains  applied  to  conditions,"  agreed 
Mr.  Barlow.  "But  you  can't  deliver  the  brains  with  the  shares 
— nor  the  conditions  in  abiding  form." 

"Just  what  are  these  conditions,  Barlow.'"'  asked  Bob. 
"I'm  a  little  rusty." 

"The  conditions  are  these,  I  take  it,"  replied  the  secretary. 
**During  the  last  seventy-five  years  or  so  there  has  been  an 
extraordinary  improvement  in  the  arts  which  has  increased  the 
product  of  a  laborer  under  efficient  direction  to  many  times 
what  it  was  at  the  beginning  of  the  era.  But  wages  though 
they  have  increased  materially  have  not  increased  in  anything 
like  the  ratio  to  the  increased  product.  If  capital  were  not 
blind — if  it  sought  the  most  efficient  entrepreneurs  and  them 
only,  and  there  were  free  competition  between  the  entre- 
preneurs, their  eagerness  to  use  profitably  all  of  the  capital  at 
their  disposal  would  have  made  them  such  active  bidders  in 


PAULINE    PARSONS  55 

the  wage  market  that  wages  would  have  advanced  considerably 
more.     But  unfortunately  only  a  small  portion  of  the  capital 
flows  into  the  hands  of  the  most  efficient  entrepreneurs  and  a 
large  part  of  it  flows  into  the  hands  of  even  the  most  incompe- 
tent.    The  latter  can  afford  to  pay  no  more  in  wages  than 
their  ability  enables  them  to  get  out  of  the  workers.     If  they 
pay  more  they  fail.     They  have  had  to  pay  no  more  because 
the  demand  for  laborers  by  the  more  competent  entrepreneurs 
has  been  checked  by  their  limited  capital — while  at  the  same 
time  the   wage   market   has   been    further   glutted   during  the 
same  period  by  the  following  of  the  home  industries  into  the 
factory  by  the  women.     They  are,  however,  gradually  having 
to   pay   more    and    the   least    competent   are   being   gradually 
weeded  out.     You  see  then,  Miss  Elsingham,  that  the  fourth 
item  is  as  Mr.  Condor  says,  the  reward  of  brains,  but  it  is  a 
reward  that  depends  on  conditions.     The  purchaser  of  shares 
in   the   capitalization   of  this    item   having   failed   to   buy   the 
brains  with  the  shares  and  moreover,  having  failed  to  assure 
themselves  of  the  permanency  of  the  conditions,  cannot  be  held 
to   be   innocent  purchasers   as   against   the  workers   who  have 
been  retarded  by  the  conditions  and  who  may  be  expected  to 
oppose    attempts    to    make    the    conditions    permanent.     The 
wiser — and  least  innocent — of  the  investors,  I   imagine,   have 
frankly  hoped  that  concentrated  control  of  the  flow  of  capital 
into    accredited    channels    would   both    furnish    a    satisfactory 
substitute  for  brains   and  secure  the  permanency  of  the  con- 
ditions." 

"And  the  tendency  now  will  be — will  continue  to  be — the 
securing  to  the  wage  earners  of  a  larger  part  of  the  product," 
supplemented  Bob. 

"Yes.  As  long  as  combinations  in  the  control  of  capital  are 
not  permitted  to  prevent  its  flowing  freely  to  the  use  of 
entrepreneurs  of  ability  who  are  eager  to  reap  the  profit — 
wages  of  superintendence — consisting  of  the  difference  between 
what  they  can  make  wage  earners  produce  under  their  man- 
agement and  what  they  have  to  pay  them  in  market  wages,  the 
rate  of  wages  will,  other  things  being  equal,  tend  upward. 
There  are  several  influences  which  tend  to  accelerate  the  bring- 
ing of  wages  and  product  closer  together — the  activity  of  the 
trade  unions  and  growing  public  sympathy  with  their  aims  as 
long- as  they  act  within  reason — the  elimination  of  children 
from  the  wage  market — the  shortening  of  the  hours  of  labor — 


56  PAULINE    PARSONS 

the  prohibition  of  unsuitable  labor  for  women,  and  of  all  labor 
for  very  young  women — ability  of  men,  as  they  receive  higher 
wages,  to  marry  early  and  support  their  wives  and  children — 
especially  their  daughters — at  home.  But  above  all,  the  most 
material  factor  will  be  the  seeing  to  it  that  there  are  no  com- 
binations to  keep  capital  from  reaching  the  hands  of  able  in- 
dependent entrepreneurs  willing  to  operate  on  a  smaller  margin 
of  profit." 

"Do  I  gather  that  you  favor  combinations  of  wage  earners 
while  opposing  combinations  of  capitalists?"  asked  Crandall, 
one  of  whose  clients  was  having  trouble  with  organized  labor. 

"I  do — under  existing  conditions." 

"How  do  you  justify  that  position.?"  demanded  Crandall 
tartly. 

"To  mention  just  one  ground — because  one  kind  of  com- 
bination has  become  so  powerful  that  it  scarcely  hides  its  con- 
sciousness of  power  to  force  its  will  upon  the  will  of  the  electo- 
rate while  the  other  has  barely  started  to  accomplish  a  raising 
of  the  standard  of  living  where  it  will  do  the  most  good,"  re- 
plied Mr.  Barlow. 

"Do  you  say  that  it  is  nothing  to  have  raised  wages  to 
such  a  level  that  they  are  a  crushing  burden  upon  our  indus- 
tries.''" asked  Mr.  Condor,  who  ever  evinced  a  tender  regard 
for  our  industries. 

"While  there  are  so  many  men  who  cheerfully  assure  us 
that  they  are  worth  to  our  industries  twenty-five  thousand 
dollars  or  more  a  year,  I  fail  to  grow  much  excited  over  the 
burden  imposed  by  a  wage  of  five  dollars  a  day  received  by 
heads  of  families."  There  were  some  sly  smiles  at  this  counter 
of  Mr.  Barlow's  for  it  was  generally  understood  that  Mr. 
Condor's  salary  was  fifty  thousand  dollars. 

"Do  you  make  no  allowance  for  diflFerence  in  service.?" 
asked  the  sponsor  for  industry. 

"I  do.  But  there  is  room  for  liberal  recognition  of  differ- 
ence in  service  within  very  much  narrower  limits.  Under  a 
civilization  as  artificial  as  ours  it  is  reasonable  to  inquire 
whether  our  measurements  of  difference  in  service  are  not 
largely  artificial,"  responded  the  secretary. 

"But,  at  any  rate,  such  discrimination  is  class  legislation — 
you  can't  get  away  from  that."    This  from  Professor  Walthall. 

"I  make  no  attempt  to  get  away  from  it.  Practically  all 
legislation  now  is  class  legislation — in  the  main  regulating  the 


PAULINE    PARSONS  57 

status  of  classes  made  by  past  legislation.  The  only  party 
which  is  entitled  to  that  *cry'  is  the  party  of  anarchy.  All 
that  the  rest  of  us — who  believe  that  rules  are  needed  to  enable 
us  to  live  happily  and  peacefully  together  in  society — may 
demand  is  class  legislation  that  is  just — and  the  safe-guards 
against  the  classes  becoming  castes." 

"But  is  it  just  to  discriminate  between  combinations  of 
capitalists  and  combinations  of  wage  earners.'"'  asked  the  Pro- 
fessor. 

"That  depends  upon  how  you  discriminate.  There  is 
nothing  inherently  unjust  in  discriminating  between  things  that 
are  different.  On  the  contrary  there  is  prima  facie  injustice  in 
not  discriminating  between  them." 

"How  do  you  make  out  that  they  are  different.''"  demanded 
the  Professor. 

"Because  one  is  of  such  little  political  power  that  new  and 
ancient  judicial  interpretations  to  its  hurt  still  go  unchecked 
by  the  legislature,  while  the  other  has  practically  dictated  the 
policies  of  government  and  is  a  real  danger  to  the  state;  be- 
cause one  is  a  combination  of  individuals  to  whom  the  state  has 
not  only  given  no  aid  but  who  have  had  from  the  beginning 
to  work  against  the  prejudice  of  feudal  and  then  commer- 
cialized law  only  slowly  becoming  humanized,  while  the  other 
is  a  combination  of  individuals  into  whose  hands  the  state  has 
given  the  most  powerful  tool  ever  handled  by  men — the  corpo- 
ration. One  ought  to  oppose  trade  unions  whenever  they  act 
in  detriment  to  the  rights  of  others,  but  his  opposition  will 
be  on  distinctly  different  grounds  than  the  grounds  of  his 
opposition  to  combinations  of  capitalists — using  this  tool  as  a 
weapon.  An  attempt  to  classify  the  two  things  together  is  an 
absurdity  on  its  face." 

"The  framers  of  the  Sherman  Anti-Trust  law  classified 
them  together,"  suggested  Mr.  Crandall. 

"It  is  no  less  an  absurd  classification  because  of  that," 
answered  Mr.  Barlow.  "Compromises  though  often  necessary 
are  usually  imperfect.  Take  away  from  the  capitalists  the 
tool  we  have  given  them  and  without  which  their  combinations 
would  be  powerless  for  evil — then  there  may  be  reason  in 
classing  together  the  two  kinds  of  combinations." 

"Do  you  favor  abolishing  corporations.?"  demanded  Cran- 
dall. 

"No.     On  the  contrary,  I  believe  in  improving  them.     Cor- 


58  PAULINE    PARSONS 

poration  laws  are  good  examples  of  class  legislation — but 
beneficent  legislation,  so  long  as  we  insist  that  the  corporation 
be  used  as  a  tool,  not  as  a  weapon.  I  have  little  doubt  but 
that  we  shall  find  means  to  insure  this." 

"But  the  labor  unions  may  incorporate  too  if  they  wish," 
said  Crandall. 

"True.  But  if  they  did  they  would  embrace  many  disad- 
vantages and  no  advantages.  The  immunities  of  corporations 
are  designed  for  capitalists  not  laborers.  Should  the  state  offer 
incorporated  labor  immunities  of  value  to  laborers,  laborers 
might  incorporate  and  then  there  might  be  more  reason  to  leg- 
islate in  one  breath  about  the  two  classes  of  corporations. 
Even  then,  however,  they  would  be  distinctly  different  things." 

"But  is  there  not  danger  that  the  trade  unions  may  become 
a  great  political  power.?"  asked  Professor  Walthall. 

"When  that  threatens  we  shall  know  what  to  do  with  them." 

"It  may  be  too  late." 

"I  have  no  fear  of  that.  But  at  any  rate  it  is  a  risk  that 
we  must  take — because  of  the  aid  they  can  give  and  are  giv'ing 
us  in  handling  the  power  that  is  dangerous  now." 

"Yet  such  a  competent  observer  as  E.  Sereno  Martin,  the 
economist,  is  of  the  opinion  that  modem  business  cannot  be 
carried  on  successfully  except  by  these  big  combinations  of 
capital  operating  along  lines  of  cooperation  rather  than  com- 
petition," said  Crandall. 

"First  noting  the  difference  between  growth  and  combina- 
tion I  can  say  further  only  that  having  in  mind  no  specific 
argument  of  Mr.  Martin's,  I  am  unable  to  refute  it,"  said  Mr. 
Barlow. 

"Leave  his  arguments  to  one  side.  Are  not  his  opinions 
valuable  just  as  opinions.''"  persisted  Crandall  in  a  somewhat 
overbearing  manner. 

"His  opinions  have  no  weight  with  me,"  said  Mr.  Barlow. 
"On  the  contrary  Mr.  Martin's  affirmative  opinion  upon  any 
economic  proposition  about  which  I  had  no  other  evidence,  I 
should  take  as  prima  facie  evidence  that  the  proposition  is  not 
true." 

"You  astonish  me!  Mr.  Martin's  articles  in  the  Mirror 
are  generally  held  to  be  weighty  contributions  to  political 
opinion  upon  economic  subjects.  How  do  you  justify  such  a 
broad  criticism  as  you  have  just  made.'"'  demanded  the  lawyer. 

"If  I  knew  that  a  man  believed  the  earth  to  be  flat,  I 


PAULINE    PARSONS  59 

should  distrust  his  opinion  upon  any  proposition  in  astronomy. 
So  knowing  of  Mr.  Martin's  belief  that  the  artificial  diversion 
of  industry  from  profitable  into  unprofitable  channels  is  an 
economic  advantage,  I  distrust  his  opinion  upon  any  other 
economic  subject,"  said  Mr.  Barlow. 

"Does  not  that  savor  rather  too  much  of  the  argumentum 
ad  hominem — coming  from  one  who  is  such  a  stickler  about 
logic?"  asked  Mr.  Crandall  dryly. 

"Not  at  all,"  replied  Mr.  Barlow.  "We  are  talking  about 
opinions." 

"Good  one.  Barlow!     Good,"  cried  Lovering. 

"I  confess  you  have  a  quicker  wit  than  mine,  Lovering," 
sneered  Crandall.     "I  don't  see  the  distinction." 

"Do  you  mean  to  tell  me  that  you,  Crandall,  one  of  the 
keenest  trial  lawyers  in  Boston,  do  not  see  that  it  holds  good 
out  of  the  court  room  as  well  as  in  it  that  opinion  as  of  an 
expert  is  not  to  be  admitted  in  evidence  until  the  witness 
qualifies  as  an  expert.'*"  demanded  Lovering.  "If  he  qualifies 
as  an  ignoramus  instead  his  opinion  is  valueless.'"' 

"Ignoramus  is  a  harsh  word,"  said  Crandall,  coloring.  He 
was  aware  that  the  shoe  fitted  his  own  foot  if  it  fitted  Mr. 
Martin's. 

"To  Barlow,  Martin  is  an  ignoramus  on  economics  and  it  is 
in  Barlow's  mind  that  you  are  trying  to  get  admission  for 
Martin's  opinion." 

"But  leaving  technicalities  to  one  side  is  it  not  a  fact  that 
we  need  these  big  combinations .'"'  asked  Mr.  Condor,  addressing 
the  secretary. 

"No.  Size  alone  is  of  no  value.  What  we  want  is  size  with 
ability.  Growth  under  conditions  of  competition  and  the  main- 
tenance of  position  under  the  ever-present  pressure  of  com- 
petition are  guarantees  of  ability  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  times. 
But  combination  resulting  from  stock  shuffling  carries  abso- 
lutely no  guarantee  of  any  industrial  ability — only  expertness 
in  financial  intrigue.  In  the  noncompetitive  environment  which 
can  be  brought  about  over  night  you  have  just  the  state  of 
affairs  in  which  continued  success  may  be  built  upon  exploita- 
tion instead  of  service." 

"But  under  proper  regulation  the  people  have  a  sure  pro- 
tection against  exploitation,"  persisted  Mr.  Condor. 

"At  the  cost  of  keeping  Big  Business  constantly  in  politics 
with  all  the  possibilities  of  corruption  corresponding  to  the 


60  PAULINE    PARSONS 

magnificence  of  the  prizes ;  plutocracy  and  bureaucracy  hand 
in  glove  dividing  the  power  and  the  spoils — the  attempted  per- 
petuation of  that  fake-individualism  which  must  surely  find  its 
Nemesis  in  the  crumbling  of  the  whole  structure  built  upon  pri- 
vate property,"  replied  Mr.  Barlow.  "Without  competition 
the  whole  thing  comes  down  to  a  mere  matter  of  opinion  ex- 
pressed at  the  polls — if  fortunately  not  with  arms.  Dividends 
not  constantly  subject  to  the  test  of  competition  are  just  things 
for  arbitrary  measurement.  A  public  living  in  an  atmosphere 
of  corruption  and  dollar  politics  will  in  the  end  make  short 
work  of  them.  Having  no  characteristic  test,  even  conscien- 
tious voters  will  have  doubts  whether  particular  dividends  have 
not  outlived  service." 

"That  is  your  opinion,"  said  Crandall,  with  a  slight  accent 
upon  the  last  word. 

"Just  good  for  what  it  is  worth,"  laughed  Mr.  Barlow. 
"Prophecy  is  always  gratuitous." 

"But  right  is  right  with  conscientious  people — whether  div- 
idends have  outlived  service  or  not,"  protested  Miss  Elsack. 

"If  you  mean  legal  right  that  may  be  easily  changed,  Miss 
Elsack,"  replied  Mr.  Barlow.  "If  you  mean  moral  right,  then 
one  who  comes  into  the  court  of  morality  must  do  so  with  clean 
hands." 

"But  isn't  that  a  harsh  way  of  putting  it.''"  inquired  Miss 
Elsingham.  "Much  of  the  wealth  has  been  earned  with  clean 
hands." 

"A  great  part  of  the  wealth  of  the  country  has  been 
earned  honestly  and  with  benefit  to  the  country,  but  no  one 
has  an  unconditional  moral  right  to  his  pound  of  flesh." 

"I  have  been  much  interested  in  your  views,  Mr.  Barlow," 
said  Professor  Walthall.  "I  want  to  have  another  talk  with 
you  one  of  these  days  if  we  can  arrange  it.  I  am  particularly 
interested  in  your  distinction  between  combinations  of  unaided 
individuals  and  combinations  of  individuals  into  whose  hands 
the  state  has  given  a  tool  >vithout  sufficient  guarantees  that  it 
be  not  used  as  a  weapon.  But  I  want  to  ask  here  whether  these 
combinations  of  corporate  wealth  (or  by  means  of  corporate 
wealth)  will  not  work  out  their  own  cure,''  One  of  my  col- 
leagues is  making  an  extended  study  of  some  of  those  which 
have  failed  and  have  been  re-organized  and  I  believe  he  con- 
cludes that  our  fear  of  them  is  unnecessarily  hysterical — that 
as  with  all  other  contrivances  of  men  the  badly  managed  ones 


PAULINE    PARSONS  61 

are  sure  to  go  to  the  wall.  Is  there  not  value  in  that  con- 
clusion?" 

"Does  he  mean  by  badly  managed,  badly  managed  from 
the  point  of  view  of  the  shareholders?"  asked  Mr.  Barlow. 

"Well — yes — I  believe  he  does,"  replied  Mr.  Walthall  with 
a  laugh,  and  he  added,  "and  your  question  gives  me  your 
answer." 

"Eh?     I  don't  see  it,"  from  Mr.  Condor. 

"Why,  it  is  this,  Mr.  Condor,"  said  the  professor.  "Those 
who  like  Mr.  Barlow  are  rather  more  interested  in  the  wage 
earner  and  the  raising  of  the  standard  of  living  where  it  will 
do  the  most  good — and  in  the  consumer  perhaps — than  in  the 
receiver  of  dividends  are  afraid  of  the  successful  combinations, 
not  the  failures." 

"If  that  is  Mr.  Barlow's  view,  he  is  certainly  frank  in  his 
partisanship  against  property,"  snapped  Mr.  Condor  with  a 
glance  of  disapproval  at  the  secretary. 

"That  is  my  view,  Mr.  Condor.  But  don't  misunderstand. 
I  have  no  prejudice  against  the  receiver  of  dividends.  I  con- 
tend merely  that  there  is  nothing  so  sacred  about  dividends 
that  we  are  bound  to  safeguard  them  at  the  expense  of  others." 

"Miss  Parsons'  secretary  evidently  feels  that  he  has  over- 
shot his  mark,"  said  Mr.  Crandall,  in  a  low  tone  to  Mrs.  Orton. 
"At  this  particular  time,  your  niece's  intentions  are  of  great 
moment  to  the  business  world.  During  the  last  few  days  there 
has  been  considerable  misgiving  felt  amongst  those  who  are 
striving  for  coordination  of  effort  lest  your  niece  had  fallen 
under  an  adverse  influence  as  harmful  to  her  own  interests  as 
to  the  business  welfare  of  the  country.  But  what  I  have  seen 
tonight  satisfies  me  that  the  street — er — that  is — the  business 
world  has  been  unnecessarily  alarmed." 

"The  business  world  need  never  have  felt  uneasy,"  said 
Mrs.  Orton,  with  the  positiveness  of  conviction.  "IMy  niece 
is  too  strong  a  character  to  yield  to  the  influence  of  an  idle, 
talkative  observer." 

"At  any  rate  he  has  not  lasted,"  thought  Crandall  cheer- 
fully to  himself. 


62  PAULINE    PARSONS 


VIII 

"To  go  back  a  bit,  Mr.  Barlow,"  said  Commodore  Lurton, 
taking  advantage  of  the  pause  which  followed  the  secretary's 
last  words,  "you  speak  of  men  supporting  their  wives  and 
daughters  at  home.  But  the  women  no  longer  want  that  life 
of  idleness — as  they  call  it — they  want  to  be  out  in  the  world 
working  shoulder  to  shoulder  with  the  men — sharing  their 
burden,  as  they  say." 

"It  seems  to  me,"  replied  Mr.  Barlow,  "that  women  take  a 
narrow  view  of  life  who  see  no  alternative  between  working  for 
gain  and  idleness.  As  to  what  the  women — the  overwhelming 
majority  of  them — want,  my  own  observation  leads  me  to  be- 
lieve, Commodore,  that  they  do  not  want  to  be  out  in  the  men's 
world  working  shoulder  to  shoulder  with  them.  I  think  it 
must  be  a  matter  of  common  notice  that  wherever  the  means 
are  ample  the  women  actually  do  make  the  home  and  the  work 
of  the  world  that  is  not  for  profit  their  sphere." 

"But  wh}'  not  let  us  express  our  wishes  with  our  ballots?" 
asked  Miss  Elsack.  "Then  you  won't  have  to  rely  upon 
common  observation." 

"I  am  willing.  Miss  Elsack — ^provided  you  impose  no  gratu- 
itous burden  on  women  who  believe  that  on  the  whole  men  have 
represented  them  chivalrously,  justly,  manfully,  if  not  always 
intelligently ;  who  are  absorbed  in  the  carrying  of  women's 
burden;  and  are  willing  to  leave  to  men  those  burdens  which 
men  are  especially  fit  to  carry." 

**How  are  we  going  to  exercise  the  franchise  without  impos- 
ing the  duty  upon  unwilling  women?" 

"I  don't  know.  Miss  Elsack,"  laughed  Mr.  Barlow.  *'There 
is  a  chance  for  women  to  demonstrate  their  skill  in  constructive 
politics." 

"Do  you  mean  to  assert  that  women  are  not  as  fit  as  men 
to  exercise  the  franchise,"  asked  Miss  Elsack. 

"I  say  it  without  apology  for  I  do  not  think  it  at  all 
uncomplimentary  to  your  sex — I  do." 

"Mr.  Barlow!  Do  you  mean  to  tell  me  that  the  common 
bar-room  loafers   are  better   fit  to   vote  intelligently  than — 


PAULINE    PARSONS  68 

than — "  Miss  Elsack's  eyes  circled  the  table,  hesitated  a 
moment  on  the  face  of  the  fair  hostess  but  wandered  on  and 
finally  met  the  intelligent  eyes  of  Barbara  Fleming — "than 
our  capable  moderator?" 

"Do  you  judge  of  two  gardens,  Miss  Elsack,  by  a  weed 
from  one  and  a  rose  from  the  other?"  asked  Mr.  Barlow. 

Under  the  inspiration  of  the  general  clapping  of  hands  at 
the  compliment  to  the  charming  moderator,  Mr.  Barlow  may 
have  looked  into  her  eyes  with  somewhat  warmer  approval  than 
was  absolutely  necessary.  At  any  rate  Pauline  thought  so. 
Her  fingers  played  ruthlessly  with  the  lace  of  the  delicate  fan 
and  a  chill  settled  upon  her  heart.  After  all,  what  she  had 
taken  for  his  adoration  for  herself  was  just  a  temperamental 
regard  for  women — perhaps  enhanced  by  natural  deference  to 
an  employer. 

"But  to  prohibit  young  women  from  working  for  wages — 
isn't  that  an  unwarranted  interference  with  individual  liberty 
— even  though  there  be  adequate  provision — to  which  I  suppose 
you  would  agree — for  exceptional  cases?"  asked  the  Commo- 
dore. 

"Of  course  there  must  be  elasticity,  Commodore,"  said  Mr. 
Barlow.  "As  to  individual  liberty,  I  suppose  there  is  not  a 
person  in  this  country  who  is  not  in  some  degree  restrained  in 
his  liberty.  The  question  is  whether  the  restraint  is  for  the 
greater  good  of  the  greater  number — in  the  opinion  of  the 
greater  number  persistently  expressed  at  the  polls.  Moreover, 
since  there  is  no  inalienable  or  natural  right  to  incorporate 
and  therefore  no  such  right  to  contract  with  corporations,  the 
matter  of  regulating  contracts  between  individuals  and  corpo- 
rations, practically  the  only  contracts  requiring  regulation,  is 
not  a  case  of  interfering  with  individual  liberty  at  all  but  a 
matter  of  regulating  state-made  status.  I  have  not  noticed 
that  legislatures  or  courts  have  given  any  consideration  to 
that  point  but  it  seems  to  me  to  be  controlling." 

"But,  in  speaking  of  corporations  as  in  the  category  of 
status,  you  seem  to  forget  the  decision  in  the  Dartmouth 
College  Case,"  objected  Crandall. 

"Don't  you  miss  the  point,  Crandall?"  asked  Barlow. 
"That  decision  settled  no  political  question  for  believers  in 
democracy.  The  fact  that  the  people  rested  satisfied  with  a 
I^ractical  way  of  repudiating  it — by  further  legislation — binds 


64  PAULINE    PARSONS 

no  one  outside  of  the  narrow  domain  of  academic  corporation 
law." 

Lovering  laughed. 

"But  in  the  cases  where  both  parties  are  individuals — regu- 
lation there  is  clearly  an  interference  with  individual  liberty,'* 
suggested  Commodore  Lurton. 

"And  therefore  to  be  undertaken  if  at  all  upon  different 
grounds  than  where  one  party  is  a  corporation.  It  seems  to 
me  that  individuals  may  and  ought  to  be  left  as  much  as 
possible  to  free  contract." 

"You  are  a  queer  individualist,  Mr.  Barlow!"  growled  Mr. 
Condor. 

"In  an  era  of  fake-individualism,  real  individualism  is 
bound  to  look  queer,"  admitted  the  secretary. 

"But  a  little  while  ago  you  spoke  rather  disparagingly  of 
discipline  imposed  by  others,"  suggested  Professor  Mann. 

**As  to  its  effect  upon  progress,"  amended  Mr.  Barlow. 
"But  where  individual  progress  lags — where  individuals  fail  to 
grow  to  the  requirements  of  the  social  environment — discipline 
is  necessary  as  a  stop-gap,  pending  wider  individual  progress. 
I  am  not,  however,  advocating  radical  prohibitions  for  the 
purposes  of  raising  wages.  Majorities  do  things  whether  they 
are  justified  or  not.  But  the  more  immoral  or  inexpedient  a 
proposed  measure  is,  the  less  likely  is  it  that  majorities  in 
favor  of  it  will  be  persistent  enough  to  make  it  effective. 
Probably  no  measure  of  labor  prohibition  grounded  upon  the 
sole  purpose  of  raising  wages  could  come  anywhere  near  at- 
tracting a  substantial  majority  of  the  electorate  to  its  support. 
But  persistent  majorities  are  supporting  conservative,  though 
constantly  widening  prohibitions,  upon  the  score  of  public 
health.  And  possibly  there  may  be  some  day  persistent  ma- 
jorities in  favor  of  prohibitions  in  behalf  of  a  better  standard 
of  living.  But  the  very  conservative  movement  now  observable 
towards  raising  the  age  for  child  labor — on  grounds  of  public 
health — especiall}'^  if  on  the  same  grounds  some  weight  is  given 
to  the  difference  of  sex — will  probably  have  great  and  cumu- 
lative effect  on  wages.  If  a  few  men  send  their  children  out 
to  earn  part  of  the  family  income  the  effect  on  wages  is  such 
that  other  men  have  to  do  likewise.  Prohibit  men  from  sending 
their  younger  children  out  to  earn  wages  and  the  effect  is 
such  that  other  men  can  and  voluntarily  will  keep  their  older 
children  at  school.     The  effect  on  wages  is  cumulative." 


PAULINE    PARSONS  65 

"But  won't  higher  wages  simply  mean  higher  prices?"  asked 
the  Commodore. 

"No.  There  is  in  general  no  connection  between  higher 
wages  and  higher  prices  until  wages  become  so  high  that  the 
supply  of  products  is  effected  through  the  unwillingness  of 
entrepreneurs  to  operate  at  the  prevailing  rate  of  profit.  The 
rate  of  profit — wages  of  superintendence — is  not  fixed,  unal- 
terable. It  depends  upon  the  willingness  of  entrepreneurs  to 
sell  their  time  and  ability  at  the  prospective  price.  As  the 
rate  of  wages  goes  up,  the  rate  of  the  wages  of  superintendence 
will,  other  things  being  equal,  come  down.  Of  course  if  further 
great  advances  in  the  arts  should  add  still  more  to  the  pro- 
ductiveness of  the  wage  earner,  wages  of  superintendence  would 
increase  unless  ordinary  wages  kept  pace  with  or  outstripped 
this  increased  productiveness.  The  principal  thing  is  to  pro- 
hibit such  control  of  capital  by  means  of  the  powerful  tools 
to  which  I  have  referred  that  it  may  easily  be  restricted  to  the 
use  of  entrepreneurs  bound  by  gentlemen's  agreements  or  in 
any  other  way  to  maintain  profits." 

"Apparently  you  do  not  hold  to  the  theory,  Mr.  Barlow, 
that  after  interest,  rent  and  wages  of  superintendence  are  paid 
the  wage  earners  get  all  the  rest — that  is,  they  get  all  they 
produce,"  suggested  Professor  Walthall. 

"Certainly  I  do — but  in  making  that  statement  one  must 
not  yield  to  the  notion  that  the  wages  of  superintendence  is  a 
fixed  charge  that  must  be  paid  at  all  events  and  at  an  un- 
changeable rate.  It  is  equally  true  to  say  that  after  rent, 
interest  and  wages  are  paid  the  entrepreneur  gets  all  the  rest 
— but  there  again  we  must  not  get  the  notion  that  wages  is  a 
fixed  charge  to  be  paid  at  all  events  and  at  an  unalterable 
rate.  The  better  way  to  express  it  is  to  say  that  after  rent 
and  interest  are  paid  the  wage  earner  and  the  entrepreneur 
between  them  get  all  the  rest— -dividing  it  betwen  them  in  pro- 
portion to  their  relative  advantage  in  bargaining — that  is,  in 
dependence  upon  the  supply  and  demand  for  laborers  and 
entrepreneurs.  The  supply  of  wage  earners  at  a  price  consti- 
tutes the  demand  for  entrepreneurs — if  the  price  goes  up  some 
of  the  entrepreneurs  who  were  operating  on  the  ragged  edge 
of  failure  will  fall,  if  it  goes  down  some  men  who  could  not 
formerly  operate  at  a  profit  now  can  and  they  become  entre- 
preneurs. On  the  other  hand  the  supply  of  entrepreneurs  at  a 
price  constitutes  the  demand  for  wage  earners.     If  there  are 


66  PAULINE    PARSONS 

too  many  to  maintain  profits  those  who  can  will  outbid  those 
who  cannot  pay  higher  wages — directly  or  indirectly  through 
lower  prices.  If  there  are  not  enough  the  pressure  of  the 
supply  of  wage  earners  will  lower  wages." 

"You  have  considerable  faith  in  abstractions,  Mr.  Barlow," 
observed  Mr.  Sounder,  the  pragmatist. 

"Yes,  I  find  most  men,  even  pragmatists,  carry  abstractions 
to  the  polls.  The  harm  is  not  in  abstractions,  but  in  false  or 
unreal  abstractions." 

"Then  the  supply  of  capital  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  rate 
of  wages,"  suggested  Bob. 

"On  the  contrary  it  has  everything  to  do  with  it — and  also 
with  the  rate  of  wages  of  superintendence.  But  it  has  nothing 
to  do  with  the  relation  between  the  rate  of  wages  and  the 
rate  of  wages  of  superintendence  except  in  so  far  as  it  blindly 
seeks  the  less  competent  entrepreneurs  or  can  be  so  controlled 
as  to  be  largely  diverted  to  the  special  use  of  entrepreneurs — 
mainly  corporations  centrally  controlled — associated  together 
for  profit  protection." 

"But  do  you  not  overlook  the  fact,  Mr.  Barlow,  that  there 
are  many  industries  where  even  the  most  efficient  and  most 
advantageously  placed  entrepreneur  works  on  a  very  small 
margin  of  profit?"  asked  the  Commodore  thoughtfully. 

"I  have  net  overlooked  these  cases,"  replied  Mr.  Barlow. 
"But  I  regard  them  not  as  typical,  but  exceptional.  Of  course 
where  the  mal-adjustment  of  wages  to  product  does  not  exist 
there  need  be  no  readjustment,"  said  Mr.  Barlow.  "Where 
trades  unions  have  been  unusually  eifective,  for  instance,  and 
have  advanced  wages  somewhat  adequately  in  comparison  with 
the  increased  power  to  produce,  there  will  be  less  room  for  an 
advance  in  wages.  Again,  where  the  price  of  the  product  has 
been  kept  down  by  law  so  that  at  a  higher  scale  of  wages  no 
entrepreneurs  would  be  found  willing  to  continue  to  operate, 
as  in  the  case  of  some  public  utilities,  the  result  of  a  general 
advance  of  wages  would  be  either  that  the  public  would  have 
to  pay  more  for  the  product — in  these  cases,  usually,  service — 
or  the  state  would  have  to  take  over  such  enterprises  and 
operate  them  at  a  loss.  But  the  typical  condition  of  industry 
is  that  where  the  laborer  working  under  the  most  fruitful  man- 
agement gets  such  a  small  part  of  his  product  and  the  entre- 
preneur such  a  large  part  that  there  results  an  unstable  equi- 
librium which,  unless  we  allow  the  control  of  capital  to  the  use 


PAULINE    PARSONS  67 

of  combinations,  is  in  time  bound  to  be  destroyed  by  mere  com- 
petition. This  aside  from  any  steps  the  public  may  take  as  to 
the  labor  of  women  and  children. 

"In  Europe  they  do  not  look  upon  leadership  as  a  crime," 
Mr.  Puff  here  interposed  indignantly. 

"I  thought  I  had  made  it  plain,  Mr.  Puff,  that  I — "  be- 
gan Mr.  Barlow. 

"You  have,  it  seems  to  me,  a  distorted  notion  about  our 
great  financial  leaders,"  interrupted  Mr.  Puff.  "They  feel  as 
deeply  as  the  muck-raking  reformers — but  they  keep  their 
heads." 

"Nobody  denies,  Mr.  Puff,"  said  Mr.  Walthall,  "that  in 
your  'Captain  of  Industry  and  the  Radical'  you  have  drawn  a 
pretty  picture  of  the  effect  of  a  pipe,  good  tobacco  and  a  cheer- 
ful campfire,  upon  the  driving  energies  of  the  man  of  action. 
But  what  is  needed  is  not  sentiment,  nor  even  a  sense  of  justice, 
but  enlightened  self-interest  and  even  if  it  is  only  a  little 
enlightened  it  will  help." 

"And  Mr.  Barlow  has  not  been  classifying  men  by  voca- 
tions," amended  E^arbara.  "He  has  been  discussing  principles. 
Every  man,  whatever  his  calling,  may  take  his  stand  on  either 
side  of  a  proposition  according  to  its  merits." 

"There  is  no  question  where  gentlemen  should  stand  on  the 
labor  question,"  quoted  Mr.  Puff. 

"True,"  replied  Miss  Fleming  dryly,  "and  so  we  come 
around  to  the  old  question,  what  is  a  gentleman?" 

The  general  laugh  at  this  counter  did  not  encourage  Mr. 
Puff  to  continue  the  series  of  bulletins  from  the  old  world  with 
which,  from  time  to  time,  he  had  essayed  to  save  the  dinner 
from  being  a  failure.  He  had  come  prepared  to  be  the  lion  of 
the  evening.  The  fair  hostess,  he  thought,  had  listened  to  his 
pronouncements  from  the  smoking  rooms  of  London  clubs,  con- 
tinental chancellories  and  the  ruling  classes  of  Europe  with 
appreciation.  But  Miss  Fleming  had  guided  the  discussion 
with  a  firm  hand — she  seemed  as  pestiferously  persistent  to 
]Mr.  Puff  as  she  did  to  Mr,  Barlow. 


68  PAULINE    PARSONS 


IX 

"You  admit,  Mr.  Barlow,  that  a  rise  in  wages  would  elim- 
inate some  entrepreneurs,"  observed  Mr.  Condor. 

"I  don't  admit  it,  exactly — I  assert  it,"  laughed  Mr. 
Barlow. 

"That  is,  the  tendency  of  higher  wages  is  to  concentrate 
business  in  stronger  hands,"  crisply. 

"Yes." 

"But  is  not  that  one  of  the  things  you  complain  of?"  tri- 
umphantly. 

**No.  There  is  no  objection  to  concentration  based  on 
growth — on  competitive  ability,  service,  free  enterprise — and 
dependent  upon  the  continuance  of  those  elements.  The  objec- 
tion is  to  concentration  by  artificial  combination  through  the 
shuffling  of  stock  certificates  leading  to  control  of  capital  and 
the  perpetuation  of  incompetency  privileged  or  otherwise  and 
to  dividends  upon  incompetence.  In  short,  the  objection  is  to 
concentration  in  weak  hands." 

"Barlow,  you  are  my  man!"  quoth  Bob. 

"Eh?" 

**I  want  you  to  address  us  at  one  of  the  Saturday  luncheons 
of  the  Layman's  Law  Club." 

"Oh,  no,  Lovering.  I  cannot  do  that.  The  circumstances 
— you  know  them — make  it  quite  impossible  for  me  to  do  that." 

But  Bob,  who  did  know  the  circumstances — and  knew  where 
the  real  power  of  disposal  lay — turned  an  inquiring  look  tow- 
ards the  head  of  the  table. 

Pauline,  notwithstanding  the  chill  about  her  heart,  had 
followed  Mr.  Barlow's  explanations  with  increasing  interest — 
guessing  that  they  were  prophetic  of  the  results  of  the  task 
she  had  set  him — the  devising  of  a  scheme  for  profit-sharing. 
She  was  about  to  give  a  favorable  answer  to  Bob's  appeal 
when  unfortunately  Miss  Fleming  pushed  her  personality  into 
the  foreground  of  Pauline's  jealous  demand  upon  the  exclusive 
allegiance  of  her  secretary. 

"Oh,  Mr.  Barlow,  you  must !  I  insist !  It  was  I  who  dis- 
covered you  and  I  have  a  right  to  insist.     Of  course,*  Bob, 


PAULINE    PARSONS  69 

you  will  have  Mr.  Barlow  speak  on  one  of  your  ladies'  days 
and  will  ask  me.  I  can't  expect  to  be  moderator,  but  I  have 
a  right  to  expect  a  seat  of  honor.  Nothing  like  asking  for 
what  you  want  is  there,  Mr.  Barlow.  Come  now,  speak  up. 
Tell  Bob  he  must  give  me  the  seat  of  honor." 

"Really,  Miss  Fleming,  if  it  were  not  quite  impossible  for 
me  to  do  this  I  should  feel  flattered  to — it  has  not  been  my 
retailing  of  views — largely  second  hand — your  management — 
er — keen  appreciation  of  the  point  under — " 

The  fan  in  Pauline's  lap  had  an  unpleasant  moment. 

"Can't  you  manage  it,  Pauline.'"'  asked  Bob. 

"Mr.  Barlow  really  has  a  great  deal  to  do.  Bob,"  replied 
the  young  hostess  as  calmly  as  she  could.  "I  don't  believe — 
I  think  he  had  better  not  undertake  the  exposition  of  his  the- 
ories in  public." 

The  words  were  hardly  out  of  her  mouth  before,  catching 
a  momentary  glance  from  her  secretary,  she  realized  that  he 
had  taken  them  as  a  public  reproof.  Contrition  followed  upon 
irritation  and  she  would  have  attempted  to  put  a  different 
meaning  upon  her  words.  But  in  the  disturbed  state  of  her 
feelings  she  could  think  of  no  addendum  that  would  not  turn 
apparent  criticism  into  apparent  apology  for  his  theories. 

Barbara  turned  a  puzzled  face  from  Pauline's  to  that  of 
Mr.  Barlow.  Not  knowing  the  relation  between  them,  she 
could  not  understand  Bob's  appeal  to  their  hostess  nor  her 
assumption  of  right  to  decide  it. 

"Well,  I  don't  quite  understand — ^but  it's  not  my  party, 
so — there,  I  have  an  idea.  Let's  have  another  dinner  just 
like  this — with  orderly  discussion  of  topics  worth  while.  Ev- 
erybody listen!  I  invite  you  all  to  dine  with  us  in  Newport — 
say  four  weeks  from  tonight — if  that  suits  everybody.  How 
will  that  suit  you,  Mr.  Barlow.?  You  cannot  plead  work  at 
night  as  an  excuse — I  shan't  allow  it.  I  shall  have  one  or  two 
others — worthy  of  your  steel.  Not  that  the  men  and  women 
here  tonight  have  not  been  keen  enough.  But  we  must  have  new 
issues  raised.  You  will  accept,  Pauline.?  And  you,  Mr.  Bar- 
low— first  of  all  we  must  find  a  night  to  suit  you.  Will  four 
weeks  from  tonight  suit  you.?" 

Realizing  that  he  was  not  at  his  own  disposal  and  that  he 
was  in  disgrace  with  his  mistress  because  of  his  forwardness 
in  expressing  his  opinions,  Mr.  Barlow's  embarrassment  had 


70  PAULINE    PARSONS 

grown  apace  with  the  unfolding  of  Miss  Fleming's  plan  for 
an  adjourned  discussion. 

"I  fear  that  you  will  think  it  very  unappreciative  of  me — 
but  you  must  not  take  it  that  way — circumstances  beyond  my 
control — it  is  really — impossible — " 

"Oh,  no,  Mr.  Barlow.  You  must  not  decline.  That  eve- 
ning is  just  a  suggestion.  But  there  are  several  others,  one 
of  which  must  surely  suit  your  convenience." 

Mr.  Barlow  looked  very  uncomfortable.  Pauline  was  quick 
to  seize  the  opportunity  to  undo  the  impression  her  former 
words  had  raised  in  her  secretary's  over-sensitive  imagination. 

"I  accept,  for  one,  Barbara,"  she  said.  "And  four  weeks 
from  tonight  will  suit  me  very  well — if  it  fits  the  engagements 
of  the  others.  And  if  you  will  leave  it  to  me  I  think — I  know 
— that  I  can  promise  to — to  persuade  Mr.  Barlow  to  be  one 
of  the  party.  He  is  very  busy — I  happen  to  know — ^but  I 
will  produce  him.    He  can't  refuse  to  be  my  escort." 

She  caught  Mr.  Barlow's  eye  and  was  pleased  to  see  the 
look  of  relief  in  it.  However,  he  did  not  permit  himself  to 
believe  that  his  indiscretion  was  to  be  overlooked. 

"She  has  accepted  just  to  save  my  face.  She  will  find 
some  excuse  later,"  he  told  himself. 

"That  is  very  nice  of  you,  Pauline,"  said  Barbara — her 
face  nevertheless  indicating  her  mystification.  "And  it  is  so 
necessary  to  have  Mr.  Barlow  present  that  I  shall  leave  him  to 
your  persuasion.  But  I  am  \ery  much  displeased  with  him — 
for  not  accepting  my  invitation  directly." 

And  she  gave  Mr.  Barlow  a  look  of  pretended  disapproval. 

**Then  perhaps  this  is  a  convenient  moment  to  adjourn  to 
the  music  room,"  said  Pauline,  preparing  to  rise. 

"Oh,  but  Pauline — Barbara — my  question  !  Mr.  Barlow 
has  not  answered  it,"  exclaimed  Mrs.  Lurton. 

But  Pauline  had  caught  an  appealing  look  from  her  secre- 
tary and  in  spite  of  Mrs.  Lurton's  protest  arose.  She  knew 
now  that  all  Mr.  Barlow's  courage  and  self-confidence  had 
evaporated.  Though  she  still  felt  uneasy  at  having  pained 
him  by  her  apparent  disapproval  and  determined  to  make  it 
plain  to  him  at  the  very  earliest  moment  possible  that  he  had 
misunderstood,  she  was  conscious  of  a  certain  amount  of  ela- 
tion in  the  knowledge  that  his  moods  were  so  sensitive  to  her 
touch. 

"Since  our  thoughts  have  turned  to  more  practical  con- 


PAULINE    PARSONS  71 

• 

cerns,  Mrs.  Lurton,  I  think  the  others  may  not  be  interested 
in  the  answer  to  your  question,"  she  said  apologetically  to  that 
lady.  "But  I  hereby  order  Mr.  Barlow  to  answer  you  pri- 
vately forthwith." 

Having  seen  her  guests  comfortably  disposed  to  listen  to 
the  music,  Pauline,  observing  Bob  seated  alone  near  the  door- 
way into  the  drawingroom,  took  a  seat  beside  him.  She  be- 
came aware  at  once  that  Mrs.  Lurton  had  captured  Mr. 
Barlow.  They  were  seated  just  without  the  music  room  and 
her  secretary  was  speaking. 

"So  I  would  not  let  Mr.  Balfour's  gloomy  forebodings 
worry  me  if  I  were  you,  Mrs.  Lurton — nor  any  alleged  buga- 
boos of  philosophical  materialism,  so-called.  We  know  nothing 
of  dissolution  on  a  universal  scale.  That  this  world  may  some- 
time be  a  dead  world  is  probable  enough,  but  that  the  whole 
universe  will  revert  to  chaos,  or  that  the  gain  man  makes  on 
this  earth  will  be  lost  to  the  universe  or  to  him  is  not  implied 
in  any  theory  of  evolution  that  I  know  of — certainly  not  in 
Spencer's.  But  the  main  thing  is  to  remember  that  science, 
positive  knowledge,  all  important  to  us  here,  tells  us  nothing 
about  the  Absolute.  'God  is  in  his  heaven'  just  the  same 
though  we  allow  no  man's  theories  about  him  to  guide  our 
conduct." 

"I  cannot  tell  you  how  much  good  you  have  done  me,  Mr. 
Barlow,"  said  Mrs.  Lurton,  putting  her  hand  impulsively  upon 
his  arm.  "I  have  always  leaned  towards  beliefs  based  on  the 
solid  foundations  of  experience — they  seem  so  much  more  satis- 
fying, so  much  more  real  and  above  all  so  much  more  fruitful 
— but  I  have  been  constantly  under  that  chilling  sense  of 
hopelessness — you  know — that  questioning: 

*What  is  it  all  if  we  all  of  us  end  but  in  being  our  own  corpse- 
coffins  at  last, 

Swallow'd  in  Vastness,  lost  in  Silence,  drown'd  in  the  deeps 
of  a  meaningless  Past? 

What  but  a  murmur  of  gnats  in  the  gloom,  or  a  moment's 
anger  of  bees  in  their  hive?' 

I  see  now  that  authoritative  interpretation  of  the  Vastness 
is  beyond  our  powers,  but  the  interpretations  of  this  world  are 
just  the  interpretations  we  are  in  this  world  fit  to  make." 


72  PAULINE    PARSONS 

"Let  me  congratulate  you  on  the  acquisition  of  your  new 
secretary,  Pauline,"  said  Bob  in  a  low  tone.  "This  has  been 
a  most  stimulating  discussion." 

"Oh,  Bob,  thank  you!"  responded  Pauline,  her  eyes  beam- 
ing with  pleasure.  "Mr.  Barlow  is  just  the  kind  of  secretary 
a  person  in  my  circumstances  needs.  And  don't  you  see  that 
he  has  reached  the  fundamental  obstacles  to  democratic  pro- 
gress, real  individualism,  positive  idealism.''  Every  philosophy 
which  seeks  to  divorce  us  from  the  'ordinary  understanding 
with  which  we  generalize'  substituting  something  that  needs 
interpretation  by  proclamation  is  a  tool  in  the  hands  of  the 
pseudo-individualists  who  hope  to  continue  to  govern  the  world 
for  their  personal  pleasure  or  profit.  If  these  volunteer  ad- 
ministrators of  men  are  thorough-going  intuitionists  or  intui- 
tionists  of  the  Kantian  type  they  favor  straight-out  plutocracy 
or  straight-out  feudalism  or  a  combination  of  them — as  they 
lean  more  heavily  upon  the  divine  foundations  of  private  prop- 
erty or  upon  the  divine  right  of  kings.  If  they  are  of  the 
Hegelian  type  they  believe  in  safe- guarding  their  ends  by  a 
hand-in-glove  arrangement  with  a  controlled  bureaucracy.  If 
they  are  pragmatists  they  see  that  systematic  transcendental- 
ism does  not  appeal  to  the  multitude — ^the  growing  political 
power — and  want  to  be  free  to  appeal  now  to  science,  now  to 
transcendentalism,  again,  perhaps,  to  mysticism,  as  it  suits 
the  temper,  knowledge,  prejudices,  interests  or  even  the  press- 
ing needs  of  the  electorate." 

"Yes,  facile  pens  may  easily  be  hired  to  make  appropriate 
suggestion  to  those  who  are  always  too  ready  to  play  the  part 
of  Esau,"  commented  Lovering. 

"Of  course,  as  Mr.  Barlow  says,"  continued  Pauline,  "the 
a  priori  philosophers  may  be  perfectly  honest — the  corrupt 
and  selfish  are  not  the  worst  enemies  to  progress." 

"There  is  going  to  be  plenty  of  novelty  watching  the  little 
old  world  take  the  curves,"  said  Lovering  after  a  moment's 
pause. 

"And,  with  better  knowledge  of  the  'laws  of  life  and  the 
conditiops  of  existence,'  trying  to  keep  it  near  the  straight 
line,"  added  Pauline. 


ERRATA 

P.  7,  line  32.  Parson's  should  read  Parsons'. 

P.  11,  line  24.     know  should  read  knew. 

P.  37,  line  1.  disengenuous  should  read  disingenuous. 

line  12.     beaurcaucracy  should  read  bureaucracy. 

line  17.      The   comma    (,)    after   really   should    be 
omitted. 

P.  45,  lines  40  and  41.     beaurocrat  should  read  bureau- 
crat. 

P.  55,  line  16.  purchaser  should  read  purchasers. 

line  17.     There  should  he  a  comma  (,)  after  item. 

line  18.     The  comma  (,)  after  moreover  should  be 
omitted. 

P.  67,  line  24.     quoted  should  read  quoth. 


72  PAULINE    PARSONS 

"Let  me  congratulate  you  on  the  acquisition  of  your  new 
secretary,  Pauline,"  said  Bob  in  a  low  tone.  "This  has  been 
a  most  stimulating  discussion." 

"Oh,  Bob,  thank  you!"  responded  Pauline,  her  eyes  beam- 
ing with  pleasure.  "Mr.  Barlow  is  just  the  kind  of  secretary 
a  person  in  my  circumstances  needs.  And  don't  you  see  that 
*"»  Koc  rpached  the  fundamental  obstacles  to  democratic  pro- 

*     ^^ — -"  T»V»ilr»sonhv 


"And,  with  better  knowledge  of  the  'laws  oi  me  emv*  »,».x. 
conditiops  of  existence,'  trying  to  keep  it  near  the  straight 
line,"  added  Pauline. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  AT  LOS  ANGELES 
THE  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 


This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below 


Form  L-9-15m-3,'34 


UNIVERSITY  Of  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGRi.p^s 
LIBRARY 


B63 
375c   Brass  - 

A  chapter 
from  the  story  of 
Pauline  Parsons . 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FAW 


A  A      000  008  341    0 


